The standard of theft is that the stolen goods are not under the control of the owner. Judging from the conditions given by the stem, this condition should have been met (the stem design is not very GAI). A completed all the theft, which belongs to the completion of the crime, and later put the card back in its original place, which belongs to repentance and does not affect the determination of the completion of the theft.

There are connection theory, transfer theory, concealment theory, out-of-control theory, control theory and out-of-control plus control theory about the accomplished standard of theft. [3 1] This book holds that the standard of accomplishment of theft should be out of control in principle, that is, as long as the victim loses control of his property, whether the actor controls the property or not, it should be regarded as accomplishment of theft. Because whether theft infringes on other people's property does not depend absolutely on whether the actor controls the property, but on whether the victim loses control of his own property. Whether the actor controls the property does not change the fact that the victim's property is actually infringed. For example, for the purpose of illegal possession, the actor throws other people's property from the train staff to a remote track with the intention of getting off the train and getting it back. Whether the perpetrator recovers the property afterwards or not, the fact that the victim's property was actually infringed will not change, and it should be regarded as a crime accomplished. Of course, the loss of control of the victim and the loss of control of the actor may also be inconsistent. If it is difficult to determine whether the victim has lost control of the property, but it can be determined that the perpetrator has controlled the property, it should also be considered as theft. It should be noted that when determining the accomplished and attempted theft, we must judge it according to the nature, shape, size, the victim's possession of property and the thief's theft mode. For shoplifting, as far as small items of property (such as rings) are concerned, the actor puts the property under his arm, puts it in his pocket and hides it in his arms, which is complete; However, as far as large items of property (such as refrigerators) are concerned, it is only completed if the property is moved out of the store. Another example is stealing property from a factory. If the factory is accessible to anyone, it will be completed when the property is moved out of the original warehouse and workshop. If the access to the factory is very strict and the access door must be inspected, the inspection can only be completed if the property is removed from the access door. Another example is the theft of indirect clients. If the user controls the property, even if the user has not controlled the property, it should be regarded as accomplished. This book holds that the viewpoint of taking the actor's actual control of property as the accomplished standard pays too much attention to the subjective viciousness of the actor and ignores the protection of legal interests; Too much emphasis is placed on the form of theft, but the essence of theft is ignored.

-Zhang Mingkai's Criminal Law