Abstract: Xu Ting's behavior that he use the banking failure of ATM to remove excessive cash wantonly does not constitute embezzlement, nor a credit card fraud, but a theft. Because, Xu Ting, subjectively with illegal possession of purpose, objectively transferred the bank funds to his own peacefully, his behavior is viewed as a phenomenon of "theft of financial institution and the amount especially greatly". But owing to the great temptation of money caused by the bank's fault, the possible anticipation of Xu Ting's choice to remove excessive cash is reduced greatly. Therefore, Xu Ting's subjective malignant degree is lower than average. According to paragraph 2, article 63 of the Criminal Law, punishment on Xu Ting should be mitigated. However, mitigation of punishment can only be made below the statutory minimum sentencing range, and should not mitigate willfully.