ISSN: 2573-1734
Authors: Na J* and Xiang L
Introduction: The main controversy against such card pinching cases exists between theft and misappropriation offences. In the judgment documents, most of the funds involved are referred to as deposits. And, previous studies have not examined this controversy in particular detail. Aim: The purpose of this article is to determine the legal relationship of the three parties and the issue of possession, and to analyze what crime is constituted. Result: Firstly, this article argues that the essence of deposits is the deposit claim made by card supplier to the bank. Secondly, there is a legitimate legal relationship of debt and credit between the card supplier and the bank, while there is no legal relationship between the card user and the bank. The transaction process of the three parties in this case can be regarded as the card user conducting transactions with the bank through the intermediary of the card supplier. Then it can be determined that the holder of the deposit should be the card supplier rather than the card user. Conclusion: After identifying the correct possessor, the logic of determining the crime of misappropriation is clarified. The withdrawal behavior after card pinching can be regarded as a natural behavior after committing a crime, but in cases involving other crimes such as fraud, withdrawal behavior has substantive significance.
Keywords: Card Pinching Behavior; Deposit Claim; Misappropriation; Theft
