On the Boundary between the Exercise of Rights and Property Crimes

Abstract

In modern rule-of-law societies, the awareness of rights is intrinsic to individuals. Despite having legitimate purposes, the exercise of rights also has lawful boundaries. In the context of criminal law, discussing the exercise of rights pertains to cases of abuse of rights through property crimes, including statutory and inherent rights. Judicial practice often leans towards exoneration in such cases, but a trend towards criminalization has emerged in recent years, necessitating a scientifically unified solution from criminal law theory. To achieve effective exoneration, it is crucial to precisely define the scope and types of rights exercised, targeting the different characteristics of ownership realization and claim realization. By clarifying the protected legal interests of property crimes and exploring the relationship between criminal and civil law, the path of excluding unlawfulness should be adopted for exoneration, decriminalizing situations with a legitimate rights basis where the means are necessary and proportionate. In cases where both the constituent elements and unlawfulness are satisfied, the presence or absence of an intent to unlawfully possess should be examined through the manifestation of claim realization. When the actor has an intent to unlawfully possess, it should be recognized as a property crime.