Core Viewpoint - The structure of criminal cases in China is changing significantly, with a notable increase in the proportion of minor offenses, particularly theft, which is a high-frequency crime among minor offenses. The effective handling of minor theft cases is crucial for improving crime governance capabilities and levels [1] Group 1: Legal Framework and Policy - The principle of "leniency for minor crimes" is essential for implementing a balanced criminal policy, emphasizing that serious crimes should be punished strictly while minor crimes should be treated leniently [2] - The introduction of a sealing system for minor crime records aims to address the negative consequences faced by individuals convicted of minor theft, such as employment discrimination and social stigma [2] Group 2: Challenges in Application of the "But Clause" - The application of the "but clause" in theft cases faces challenges due to the legal principle of legality, which complicates the criteria for determining minor theft [3][4] - Judicial interpretations that define "multiple thefts" create a barrier for applying the "but clause," as the criteria for minor theft are often vague and abstract, leading to a preference for clearer legal standards [4] Group 3: Societal and Institutional Influences - The current judicial assessment system and public opinion significantly impact the application of the "but clause," with judges often avoiding its use to prevent negative evaluations of their work [5] - The entrenched belief in retributive justice among the public leads to a preference for punitive measures, making it difficult for judges to apply leniency in minor theft cases [5] Group 4: Recommendations for Improvement - There is a need to clarify the standards for assessing the cumulative amount in "multiple theft" cases to avoid ambiguity in legal interpretations [8] - Enhancing the understanding of social harm characteristics is crucial, requiring a balance between objective harm and subjective danger in assessing minor theft cases [9] - Adjustments to the current performance evaluation system for judicial personnel are necessary to promote the effective application of the "but clause" without rigid adherence to performance metrics [9]