The current "criminal law" provisions of article 264th in China: "theft of public or private property, a relatively large amount of time or theft, is less than three years imprisonment, criminal detention or control, or be fined; if the amount involved is huge or other serious circumstances, three years less than ten years imprisonment, fined the amount; the huge or other especially serious circumstances, department for more than ten years of fixed-term imprisonment or life imprisonment, and concurrently be sentenced to a fine or confiscation of property; in any of the following circumstances, he shall be sentenced to life imprisonment or death, also be sentenced to confiscation of property:
(a) the theft of financial institutions, especially huge amount of;
(two) the theft of precious cultural relics, if the circumstances are serious."

   A huge amount of 98 years according to the Supreme Court judicial interpretation refers to public and private property theft of personal value of RMB 30000 to more than 100000, the specific amount is determined by the three to one hundred thousand range. No matter how the provisions of Guangdong, 17.5 of all is a huge amount of. ATM and the inside of the money belongs to the financial institutions (banks) do not seem to have what problem. Sentenced to life imprisonment or within the legally prescribed scope. So why are we generally felt that the decision is not fair? There are three reasons: first, our law itself is not too fair, two judges in the judicial process of sentencing unfair, three convicted judge in this case has a problem.

   The judicial interpretation of the provisions of the theft of 500 ~ 3000 yuan (most provinces for 1000 yuan) can be convicted or punished, and corruption 5000 yuan can be convicted or punished. Theft of 3 ～ 100000 (in many provinces for 50000) the minimum sentence of 10 years, theft of financial institutions 50000 minimum punishment of life imprisonment, and corruption (corruption, financial institutions funds not what different) 100000 minimum sentence is 10 years. Obviously, if you steal the bank 50000 if no special lighter mitigating circumstances must be imprisonment, but if you corruption with a bank up to 100000 to 10 years, corruption, bribery, 1000000 is usually less than no time, theft by what than corruption? I are hanged, kleptocrat Hou, fair? During the judicial process, corruption, bribery of millions of sentenced to meet the eye everywhere fourteen five years, theft of hundreds of thousands of imprisonment everywhere. Corruption, bribery crime and theft of different social strata, belong to social relations, human resources are not the same, the influence is also different. Plus Chinese justice does not respect from the case, also does not have the uniform application of the balanced sentencing guidelines, arbitrariness inevitably, fairness guarantee.

   The single was "criminal law" article 264th of the crime of theft, the fairness of the provision itself is worthy of discussion, if the precious cultural relics are non renewable resources, because of their ignorance or fear caused by a large number of precious relics destroyed should be given heavier punishment may be right. But not directly provide free period, the death of two stalls, after all, the most effective method for severe punishment is not a solution to the problem. I think, the criminal law stipulated only stealing precious artifacts caused by the destruction of precious cultural relics shall be given a heavier punishment on the line. As for the theft of financial institutions and the theft of non financial institution does not have what different, there is no special provisions shall be given a heavier. The characteristics of the largest financial institutions I want is more money, about a thief. But financial institutions, security facilities is the best China, shotgun bank guard hands over the hands of six four type, distance is much better than the micro punch. Banks including ATM machine everywhere surveillance, even if the money is rarely blessed it, this point, criminals or criminal impulsive people wouldn't know. All Chinese every theft cases with one hundred thousand gauge, scanty really theft of financial institutions, success. I can responsibly tell you: theft of financial institutions, only is not a gentleman in mid-air have learned "criminal law" article 264th (a), afraid! But opponents (bank) is too strong, hard! Moreover, banks, whether state-owned or private, are just ordinary enterprises, from the legal nature and not what special different. My view is "criminal law" article 264th of the financial institutions the special provisions are not necessary.