Tārīkh-i pizishkī i.e., Medical History

Abstract

Background and Aim: Today, Cyber Theft is one of the Most Common Forms of Cybercrime, Which has Entered the Field of Proprietary Criminal Law and Has Challenged the Principles and Rules Governing Traditional Theft. This Crime, in Spite of the Similarities With its Traditional Type in Terms of Name, Result (Acquisition of Other People's Property) and Crimes Against Property, has Fundamental Differences in Terms of the Constituent Elements of Crime and Punishment. Therefore, the Purpose of this Study is to Investigate the Historical Developments of the Actus Reus in Traditional and Electronic Theft.

Materials and Methods: In the Present Study, Which Has Been Collected by Descriptive-Analytical Method and Using Library Tools, While Examining the Differences Between Traditional and Computer Theft, in Particular, the Actus Reus of These two Criminal Behaviors has Been Discussed. What has Been Discussed in Related Research so Far is the Study of Electronic Theft in the Framework of the Islamic Penal Code adopted in 1370. For this Reason, Firstly, in the Present Study, the Historical Developments of This Type of Theft Will be Examined in the Midst of Legislative Developments, and Secondly, the Author Will Emphasize and Focus on the Actus Reus of This Theft; Also, in Addition to the Discussions, the Feasibility of Committing Border Theft in the Field of Electronic Theft Will be Discussed.

Findings: There are Differences and Similarities Between Traditional and Computer Theft in Terms of the Elements That Make up Crime. Among Other Things, the Actus Reus in Both Crimes is Steal. Of Course, Steal in Cyber Theft is Different From Kidnapping in Traditional Theft. Thus, Steal in Computer Theft According to Article 12 of the Cybercrime Law Includes the Following Types of Behavior: One is "Caught" and the Other is "Cut", Which in the Dump, Unlike all Traditional Theft Cases, Still Has the Same Data at its Disposal.

Ethical Considerations: In Order to Organize this Research, While Observing the Authenticity of the Texts, Honesty and Fidelity Have Been Observed.

Conclusion: In the Present Study, it Will be Observed That the Subject of Crime is Traditional Theft of Property. However, the Subject of the Crime of Cyber Theft is Limited to Data and Information, and the Data on the Subject of Cyber Theft do Not Have to have Financial Value. Because, Firstly, in the Text of the Law, Data is Absolute, and Secondly, What is Important in Relation to Data and Information is Their Content. In Computer Theft, the Element of Illegality is Required, Which is Equivalent to the Same Dissatisfaction in Traditional Theft. One of the Important Differences Between These two Crimes is the Context of the Crime. In Computer Theft, Cybercrime is the Basis of Crime, Which is a Kind of Virtual Environment. While the Crime Scene of Traditional Theft is the External Environment or the Physical Space.

Please cite this article as: Jiba H, Rouhani Moghaddam M, aghaei bajestani M.  Historical Developments of the Actus Reus in Traditional and Electronic Theft. Med Hist J, Special Issue on the History of Islam and Iran 2020; 165-178.