Qualitative Difficulties and Solutions of Uninformed Delivery Cases

The characterization of uninformed delivery cases depends on how to understand the punishment of the victim in the crime of fraud. As a general disposition consciousness, it is necessary to say that there are still many questions whether it is the strict disposition consciousness or the easing theory. The basic structure difference between theft and fraud is the presence or absence of victim factors. The essential attribute of the victim factor is the victim's fault. The victim's fault is reflected from the victim's perspective as the victim's punishment, and the perpetrator's perspective as the victim's use. From the perspective of the perpetrator, the direction that the consciousness of punishment should not be mentioned is generally worth promoting. On this basis, the difference between theft and fraud is whether the actor has actively invaded the realm of property control of the victim before the victim's objective punishment, changing the original state of the property, so that the final punishment of the victim has only superficial meaning. With this as a standard, the qualitative problems of cases of unintentional delivery can be properly solved.