Currently, the triple crimes (deforce, obstruction and harassment) criminalized in the Article 690 of the fifth Book of the Islamic Penal Code adopted in 1375. In this article, the legislature, by guaranteeing the criminal enforcement, seeks to protect the three claims of possession, including deforce, harassment and obstruction of the right. But the phrase “... and the property belonging to the government or natural or legal persons for the purpose of seizing.” The above-mentioned article caused various interpretations in the judicial procedure. In this paper, by using the thematic analysis method, the opinions of criminal courts in this regard are examined and it was modeled in the form of four interpretations. The main axis of the difference in judicial interpretations, the two pillars of “possession” or “ownership” are based on the conditionality or non-conditionality. The critique of scattered judicial interpretations is based on how the literal interpretation of the meaning of the word “belonging” as well as the legal basis of the legislature's support for the institution of “possession”. In the present article, a view based on the condition of the three pillars of aggressive possession along with the condition that the possession is legitimate is presented as a new idea of the material elements of the crime of aggressive possession. This view does not separate criminal aggression from its origin in civil proceedings, but at the same time, in order to enjoy the maximum guarantee of criminal enforcement, the legitimacy of the plaintiff's seizure must be established on the basis of the types of legal affiliation between persons and property. By analyzing the crime of aggressive possession in the new idea, the solution of a number of judicial issues is presented and the relation of the crime of aggressive possession with the crime of harassment and obstruction of the right is redefined.