[ULPIANUS libro trigensimo ad Sabinum. ] §17.2.51.prMerito autem adiectum est ita demum furti actionem esse, si per fallaciam et dolo malo amouit, quia, cum sine dolo malo fecit, furti non tenetur: et sane plerumque credendum est eum, qui partis dominus est, iure potius suo re uti quam furti consilium inire.
[ULPIAN, in his thirtieth book on Sabinus.] However, it was rightly added that there is an action for theft only if he removed it through deceit and with malicious intent, because, when he did so without malicious intent, he is not held liable for theft; and indeed, it should generally be believed that he who is the owner of a share is using the thing by his own right rather than entering into a plan of theft.
§17.2.51.1Et ideo uidebimus, an Fabia teneatur.
And therefore we shall see whether he is held liable under the Lex Fabia.
et ratio quidem facit, ne teneatur, uerum si plagium fecit uel suppressit, Fabia teneri.
And indeed, reason makes for his not being held liable; but if he committed kidnapping or concealed it, he is held liable under the Lex Fabia.