By Zhang Shengli, correspondent of Legal Daily, and Deng Hongyang, reporter of Legal Daily
A man broke into a house to steal. The first time, he stole a card reader worth only a few yuan. The second time, he was "invited" to the police station before he could lay his hands on anything.
Recently, the People's Court of Zhongyuan District in Zhengzhou City, Henan Province sentenced the man to one year in prison for illegal intrusion into a residence, suspended for one year.
Wang Xiaowei, 30 years old, once worked for a certain imported car sales service company in Henan. At around 5 p.m. on November 28, 2009, Wang Xiaowei carried a T-shaped cone and a folding knife to Hoululu Village in Zhongyuan District of Zhengzhou City, where he forced open the doors of four rental rooms with the intention of stealing.
After searching several times, Wang Xiaowei only found a mobile phone card reader in one of the rooms, which was worth only a few yuan.
That evening, unwilling to stop there, Wang Xiaowei returned to Hoululu Village again, intending to try his luck in a few more rooms. However, this time, good fortune did not come his way. Instead, while continuing to steal, he was discovered by the crowd and subsequently arrested by the police.
After deliberation, the court believed that although defendant Wang Xiaowei had only stolen a small amount of property during the burglary, he carried dangerous weapons and used methods such as breaking down the doors of victims' residences and prying open security doors with cones to intrude into eight households for theft, seriously affecting others' normal life and residential peace. His act of illegally entering others' residences posed significant social harm and constituted the crime of illegal intrusion into a residence.
According to the case handlers, there are fewer cases where someone is solely convicted of "illegal intrusion into a residence." So why was Wang Xiaowei sentenced to imprisonment for illegal intrusion into a residence? After the trial, the reporter interviewed the presiding judge to understand the reasons behind the verdict:
In recent years, the number of household burglary cases has been increasing, seriously affecting public security and people's lives. Although the Supreme People's Court has specifically issued relevant judicial interpretations regarding the trial of theft cases, and various regions have made corresponding regulations based on their actual situations, there are no clear provisions on how to handle relatively serious theft behaviors such as committing one or two household burglaries within a year without reaching the sentencing standard, failed household burglary attempts that do not meet the legally defined "huge amount" standard, and those that are not aimed at stealing national precious cultural relics.
China's Property Law explicitly protects citizens' right to housing. Article 38, paragraph 2 stipulates: "In addition to bearing civil liability for infringing upon property rights, if administrative management regulations are violated, administrative responsibility shall be borne according to law; if a crime is constituted, criminal responsibility shall be pursued according to law."
According to China's Criminal Law and judicial interpretations, the act of secretly stealing public or private property with the purpose of illegal possession constitutes theft if the amount involved is significant or if it occurs multiple times. The higher courts of each province, autonomous region, and municipality can determine the local standards within the legal limits based on the economic development situation and social security conditions of the region. If the household burglary attempt fails or the stolen amount does not reach the standard for constituting theft, judicial authorities usually charge the offender with the crime of illegal intrusion into a residence to combat crime and maintain public security.
However, in previous judicial practices, the application of criminal penalties has been rare. There are various reasons for this: insufficient attention from law enforcement officials, treating it as a borderline crime, and weak awareness of rights protection among victims.
Regarding this case, the legal basis for holding defendant Wang Xiaowei criminally responsible is that the subjective purpose of the person committing the household burglary is to illegally possess others' property. Illegally entering another person's residence is the means behavior, while theft is the goal behavior. In other words, this type of behavior consists of two actions: illegal entry into a household and theft, and the relationship between these two behaviors is one of means and purpose. For handling such related offenses, China follows the principle of punishing the more severe offense.
Although Wang Xiaowei's theft attempt failed or the stolen amount did not reach the starting standard for theft, his household burglary had significant social harm. His actions severely violated the tranquility of citizens' residences. According to the Criminal Law, the act of illegally forcibly entering another person's residence without approval from a statutory authority or without the consent of the resident constitutes the crime of illegal intrusion into a residence.
At the same time, from the perspective of the degree of harm caused by such illegal acts, if only fines or administrative detention were imposed, it would indeed be too "lenient," easily giving the impression of "substituting punishment for criminal penalty." On the other hand, imposing labor re-education penalties ranging from one to three years on such behavior often appears too "severe" in many cases. In judicial practice, for occasional offenders, first-time offenders, attempted offenders who have not caused serious consequences, sentences generally include less than one year in prison or detention with a fine.
However, if we define and sentence such behavior as "illegal intrusion into a residence," when punishing such criminal acts, appropriately sentencing based on the circumstances, consequences, and repentance of the criminals can both achieve the purpose of punishing crimes and deter those with侥幸psychology attempting household burglary, achieving the effect of preventing crime, which better aligns with China's "combining leniency with severity" criminal policy.
Currently, theft crimes are one of the major sources of harm to public security. Zhengzhou's procuratorial organs handle more than 10,000 criminal cases each year, 70% of which are minor offenses. Outside of these minor cases, about a thousand suspects of household burglary are caught each year. Most of these suspects are released after being administratively detained due to failed theft attempts or failing to meet the criminal case filing amount standard. They quickly become members of the theft army again, and with prior theft experience, they often prepare more thoroughly and use more concealed methods during subsequent thefts, posing greater social harm. Therefore, defining and sentencing such behaviors as illegal intrusion into a residence fits the current state of public security and better reflects the concept of fair law enforcement and law enforcement for the people by judicial organs.