Does anyone study law? Help resolve disputes. Urgent!

The following is an analysis of several elements of fraud:

The basic structure of the crime of fraud is: the actor cheats-the deceived person has a wrong understanding-the other party disposes of the property based on the wrong understanding-the actor or a third person obtains the property-and the victim suffers property damage.

The key point in this case is whether the deceived person has a wrong understanding and disposed of the property based on the wrong understanding. Judging from the case, it is obvious that the deceived person has the right to dispose of the property. The key is to dispose of the property after the derailment makes the other party fall into a wrong understanding. The flaw of this statement is that the victim Liu did not dispose of his property in the end, that is, he was unwilling to hand over his private property to Feng. The crime of fraud requires that the deceived person must have a sense of punishment when distributing property. Based on case analysis,

First of all, the content of cheating is: under certain circumstances, make the other party have a wrong understanding and make the property disposition that the actor hopes. Lying that you are a staff member, entering the host's home, making friends with the host, and then living your own life, as an excuse to exchange money, is cheating, without objection. Its intention is obviously to cheat money. It would be absurd and groundless to say that Feng only used deception as a means and theft as a purpose.

Secondly, in the process of changing money, as for the action of pulling, you don't have to care too much, because scammers will take various means to attract people's eyes and ears in order to achieve the purpose of cheating. The most prominent feature of the crime of fraud is that the perpetrator tries to make the injurer have a cognitive illusion, so as to "consciously" hand over all his own or held financial resources to the perpetrator who gives up ownership. The loophole is that Liu did not take the initiative to hand over the money to Feng, that is, he did not dispose of the property.

However, in this case, it seems that Feng and Liu did not reach a money exchange deal, but in essence Feng has achieved the purpose of defrauding money. When you finally leave. Liu's laissez-faire shows that Feng has made the victim have an illusion and believe it. Liu finally acquiesced in Feng's departure, which was based on misunderstanding and uninformed disposal of property. Wind wealth is not limited to the disposal of property in the sense of Ming law, but refers to the transfer of the victim's property to the actor for possession, or the acquisition of the victim's property for himself or a third party. From this perspective, it is fraud, not theft.

In favor: According to Article 264 of the Criminal Law and the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Laws in the Trial of Theft Cases.

Article 1, the definition of theft is: for the purpose of illegal possession, secretly stealing public or private property in a large amount or for many times. In this case, Feng took away Liu's 2,000 yuan, and he quickly switched the bag without paying attention to it, and "returned" 2,000 yuan of counterfeit money to Liu. This exchange behavior was not noticed by Liu, and it was "secret". You Feng obtained the possession of 2000 yuan of real money and silver, which reached the standard of a large amount, namely "theft". In addition, Feng had long wanted to illegally possess Liu's property, and the three conditions fully met, so Feng's behavior was convicted of theft.

Counterparty: The crime of fraud is an act of defrauding others of a large amount of property by concealing the truth or fictional facts. In this case, Feng lied that he wanted to worship a red envelope without a whole wallet and asked to exchange it with Mrs. Chen and Liu, who went upstairs to withdraw money. Here, Feng fabricated the facts to make the letter think that he really got the money. Later, Feng took money out of his bag and gave it to Liu without telling him that it was fake money. This is another act of concealing the truth. Based on these two acts, Feng finally got 2000 yuan, so Feng was convicted of fraud.

Founder: According to the theory of criminal law, the behavior pattern of the crime of fraud is: committing fraud for the purpose of illegal possession-the victim has a misunderstanding based on this behavior-the victim voluntarily delivers the property to the actor based on this misunderstanding-the actor obtains the property. In this case, Liu just wanted to exchange money with Feng, and he didn't want to hand over the ownership of 2000 yuan to Feng, and Feng didn't take money because Liu apparently gave money, but because of his exchange behavior. After the fraud, the two links fell off the chain, so it does not constitute fraud.