百余名货车司机利用磅差倒卖货物，是“外快”还是犯罪？

Core Viewpoint - The case involving over a hundred truck drivers accused of theft of fertilizer from a single company highlights the complexities of ownership and loss in the transportation industry, raising questions about the legality of their actions and the definition of theft in this context [1][4][12]. Summary by Sections Case Background - The case involves 137 truck drivers accused of stealing fertilizer from Jin Kai Company, with evidence including direct transactions and confessions from some drivers [5][6]. - The drivers allegedly sold excess fertilizer, which was often considered "gifts" due to weight discrepancies during weighing processes [4][7]. Legal and Industry Context - The legal definition of theft requires a victim, leading to disputes over the ownership of the sold fertilizer [12][13]. - The transportation industry often operates under informal rules, where drivers may sell excess goods, a practice that is widespread but rarely prosecuted [8][11]. Evidence and Charges - Evidence includes transaction records and confessions, but many drivers deny any wrongdoing, claiming their actions were common practice [5][8]. - The police initially identified theft amounts ranging from thousands to tens of thousands, later revised to a few thousand or less due to the nature of the transactions [8][9]. Industry Practices - The practice of selling excess goods is described as a "hidden rule" within the trucking industry, with many drivers acknowledging its prevalence [9][11]. - Drivers often face penalties for short deliveries, leading to a culture where selling excess goods becomes a coping mechanism for financial losses [11][15]. Legal Opinions - Legal scholars are divided on whether the drivers' actions constitute theft, with some arguing that the excess goods were effectively the property of the buyers, while others maintain that the drivers illegally appropriated company property [12][15]. - The case has drawn attention to the need for clearer definitions of ownership and loss in the context of transportation contracts [13][16].