نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکترای دانشگاه علوم اسلامی رضوی
2 هیئت علمی گروه حقوق جامعه المصطفی العالمیه نمایندگی خراسان
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Abstract
Theft is subject to certain conditions, among them, the destruction of amulets and the non-usurpation of property. In Article 270 of Q.A., the lawgiver states the ruling of usurped charms, and in Article 268 of Q.A., he mentions the condition that stolen property is not usurped, but by carefully studying jurisprudential texts and legal research, it can be found that this issue has many and different types of suppositions that the legislator did not state the ruling of some suppositions in general, or it is not understood from the appearance of the legal articles, but by understanding and considering the words of the jurists and General legal rulesIn some cases, the verdict is limited to theft, and in others, the verdict is not limited to theft. In the case of theft from a usurped amulet, the property has been stolen by the owner and a person under its authority or by a third party, and the decision regarding the theft of a usurped amulet by a third party has been left silent by the legislator and based on the interpretation of Article 270 of the Islamic Republic of Iran It is possible to obtain a ruling, but this ruling is contrary to some jurisprudential and legal rulesIs. In the case of usurped property, the legislator has limited himself to mentioning the condition that the stolen property is not usurped in Note "G" of Article 268 of the Civil Code.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)