A recent court case details a man's repeated thefts from his live-in girlfriend's Alipay account and the sale of her gold jewelry, with the majority of the illicit funds spent on their shared living costs.
During their cohabitation, Dai repeatedly stole funds from his girlfriend's Alipay account and sold her gold jewelry. He used most of the stolen money for their joint living expenses and even returned a portion of it to the victim by gifting her "cash bouquets." Following a public prosecution by the Yancheng City Yandu District People's Procuratorate in Jiangsu Province, the court sentenced Dai to one year and nine months in prison, suspended for two years and six months, along with a fine, for the crime of theft on February 9.
In May 2024, a Pilates instructor using the pseudonym Xiaoxue met Dai, who was in the livestock business, on a social media app. Both were divorced with children and shared similar interests. They soon began a romantic relationship and moved in together at Xiaoxue's apartment, sharing living expenses.
On January 8, 2025, Xiaoxue accidentally discovered that one of her gold bracelets seemed to have an abnormal weight, suspecting it had been swapped. She reported this to the police. When officers arrived and questioned them, Dai claimed to know nothing. As the value of the missing item was significant, criminal investigators later intervened, at which point Dai voluntarily admitted to swapping and stealing the gold bracelet.
After receiving a summons notice from the public security organ, Dai further confessed to stealing funds from Xiaoxue's Alipay account. Dai was very concerned about his image and wanted to maintain his facade as a successful businessman in front of his girlfriend. However, after moving in together, the couple traveled and shopped almost weekly, leading to high living expenses. Meanwhile, Dai's business encountered problems, causing a cash flow shortage. Unwilling to let his girlfriend know he was out of money, Dai devised a dishonest plan.
From July to November 2024, Dai repeatedly took advantage of Xiaoxue being asleep, used her fingerprint to unlock her phone, and transferred funds from her Alipay account, totaling 30,000 yuan. Additionally, he stole Xiaoxue's gold jewelry on multiple occasions and sold it, with a total value exceeding 26,000 yuan. In the incident that led to the case, to avoid detection, Dai specifically purchased a fake bracelet online, swapped it for the gold one, and then sold the genuine article.
After the incident came to light, Dai returned all the stolen funds. In September 2025, the public security organ transferred the case to the procuratorate for review and prosecution. The handling prosecutor identified key points of controversy in the case: Dai used 10,000 yuan of the stolen money to pay for his personal business goods, while the remainder was spent on their joint living expenses. How should his actions be characterized? Furthermore, Dai had used the stolen money to commission "cash bouquets" for Xiaoxue on multiple occasions to enhance their relationship, totaling 6,000 yuan. Should this 6,000 yuan be deducted from the total amount of the crime?
"During Dai and Xiaoxue's cohabitation, they had no joint property, joint creditor's rights, or debts. Each was responsible for their own financial situation, and there was no commingling of assets. Dai, with the intent of illegal possession, repeatedly and secretly stole funds from Xiaoxue's Alipay account and her gold jewelry. The property had already left the victim's control, constituting the crime of theft, specifically a completed offense. The disposition of the stolen funds pertains to the suspect's handling of illicit proceeds after the crime was completed and does not affect the establishment of the theft charge."
After discussion in a procuratorial joint conference, the procuratorate held that Dai's use of most of the stolen funds for their joint living expenses and his gifts of "cash bouquets" to the victim were merely methods of disposing of the illicit proceeds. These actions did not alter the theft nature of his prior conduct. These sums should be fully recognized as part of the theft amount, though they could be considered as discretionary sentencing circumstances.
Following a comprehensive review, the handling prosecutor concluded that while Dai did not voluntarily confess during initial general inquiries, he did voluntarily appear before the authorities and provided a truthful account of his crimes before the investigative organ had taken compulsory measures against him or grasped the main facts of his offenses. This should be recognized as voluntary surrender.
On November 17, 2025, the Yandu District Procuratorate prosecuted Dai on suspicion of theft. The court, after trial, adopted the prosecution's charges and sentencing recommendations, and rendered the aforementioned judgment according to law.
Comments