What the landlord needs is the kind that is between several crimes and is not easy to identify.
The following is one of the topics of the court debate competition of a procuratorate in Hunan in 2006 for the landlord's reference:
At noon on June 38, 2004+10/early October, Wang deposited 2250 yuan in the bank. When the bank staff entered the deposit amount on the computer, they accidentally added a "0" after 2250 yuan, and the deposit entered into the computer became 22500 yuan instead of 2250 yuan deposited by Wang. After Wang got the passbook, he found the mistakes of the bank staff, and then took it all away at other savings points. At 5: 30 pm that day, the bank found that the reconciliation was wrong, but found that all the money had been taken away by Wang, so it contacted Wang by phone and asked him to refund the overpaid money. Wang avoided the bank staff and moved out of his original residence, so he could not be contacted. The bank staff then reported the case to the public security organ.
divergence
There are three different opinions on how to deal with the 20250 yuan taken by Wang:
The first opinion: this 20,250 yuan is just a civil unjust enrichment for Wang. The act of taking this 20250 yuan from the king is an act of transferring this unjust enrichment when the king has already possessed it. If Wang refuses to return it, the bank may bring a civil lawsuit to the people's court.
The second opinion: Wang's behavior constitutes theft. Wang subjectively believes that the theft of property will not be discovered by the property owner (bank), and the amount is huge, which has violated the criminal law and should be convicted and punished for theft.
The third opinion: Wang's behavior constitutes a crime of embezzlement.
Last year, I participated in one of the topics of the city's prosecutor's debate competition.
Defendant Yu Fei, male, aged 26, has no fixed occupation for the time being. On April 5, 2003, the defendant met his friends Zhao and Li in the street. Zhao and Li talked about owing others 6,543,800 yuan for goods due to poor management, and they urgently needed money to pay off the accounts. Yu Fei suggested that there is an expressway toll station not far from here, which can drive away toll collectors and collect fees. On the same day 17, Zhao, Li and others were driven with sticks to a toll station in a city. Yu Fei took out his stick and said that he had just come out of prison and had no money to spend. He wants to "requisition" the toll station for six hours, and orders the toll collector on duty, Lu, to rest in the car outside with the invoice and the money collected, otherwise he will suffer from "flesh and blood". Zhao and Li took Lu and Song to the car and waited together in the car. During this period, except for the toll station, Lu and Song were allowed to move on their own. At the request of Lu and Song, Zhao and Li bought dinner for them. Yu Fei charged the passing vehicles according to the highway toll standard, but claimed that the invoice was used up and the driver was not invoiced, and * * * got 30,000 yuan. After charging for 6 hours, the defendant Yu Fei and others left. On April 6, 2003, the police arrested Yu Fei after receiving the report. After investigation, the toll station is a state-owned institution.
What crimes did these three people commit?
Did the debate at that time constitute fraud? ......