Men do not despise a thief if he steal - Every man pities the poor culprit who was perishing for lack of food, and stole to satisfy his hunger; yet no law clears him: he is bound to make restitution; in some cases double, in others quadruple and quintuple; and if he have not property enough to make restitution, to be sold for a bondsman; Exodus 22:1-4; Leviticus 25:39.

[Men] do not (o) despise a thief, if he stealeth to satisfy his (p) soul when he is hungry;
(o) He does not reprove theft, showing that it is not as abominable as whoredom, for theft can be restored, but adultery is permanent, and death by the law of God.
(p) Meaning, for necessity.

Men do not despise a thief, if he steal,.... They do not discommend or reproach him for it, or fix a mark of infamy upon him, or expose him to public shame by whipping him; but rather excuse him and pity him when it appears what his case is, what put him upon it, and that he had no other intention in it than to do as follows;
to satisfy his soul; his craving appetite for food, having nothing to eat, nor no other way of getting any: the words should be supplied thus, "for he does this to satisfy his soul"; or, as the Syriac version, "for he steals to satisfy his soul": and so they are a reason why men do not despise him, nor use him ill, because it is done with no other view; not with a wicked design to hurt his neighbour, nor with a covetous intent to increase his own substance in an unlawful way, but only to satisfy nature in distress; and another reason follows, or the former confirmed;
when he is hungry; or for "he is hungry" (s); pressed with famine; the temptation is great, nature urges him to it; and though it is criminal, men in such cases wilt not bear hard upon him for it. The Targum is,
"it is not to be wondered at in a thief that he should steal to satisfy his soul when it is hungry.''
The Vulgate Latin version is,
"it is not a great fault when anyone steals, for he steals to fill a hungry soul;''
it is a fault, but it is not a very heinous one, at least it is not so heinous as adultery, for the sake of which it is mentioned, and with which it is compared: the design of the instance is to show the adultery is far greater than that; and yet in our age we see that the one is severely punished even with death for trifling things, when the other goes unpunished.
(s) "quia esurit", Cocceius, Michaelis.

Such a thief is pitied, though heavily punished.

The thief and the adulterer are now placed in comparison with one another, in such a way that adultery is supposed to be a yet greater crime.
30 One does not treat the thief scornfully if he steals
To satisfy his craving when he is hungry;
31 Being seized, he may restore sevenfold,
Give up the whole wealth of his house.
For the most part 30a is explained: even when this is the case, one does not pass it over in the thief as a bagatelle. Ewald remarks: בּוּז ל stands here in its nearest signification of overlooking, whence first follows that of contemning. But this "nearest" signification is devised wholly in favour of this passage; - the interpretation, "they do not thus let the thief pass," is set aside by Song 8:1, Song 8:7; for by 31b, cf. Song 8:7, and 34a, cf. Song 8:6, it is proved that from Proverbs 6:30 on, reminiscences from the Canticles, which belong to the literature of the Chokma, find their way into the Mashal language of the author. Hitzig's correct supposition, that בּוּז ל always signifies positive contemning, does not necessitate the interrogative interpretation: "Does not one despise the thief if...?" Thus to be understood, the author ought to have written אף כי or גם כי. Michaelis rightly: furtum licet merito pro infami in republica habetur, tamen si cum adulterio comparatur, minus probrosum est. Regarding נפשׁ in the sense of appetite, and even throat and stomach, vid., Psychologie, p. 204. A second is, that the thief, if he is seized (but we regard ונמצא not as the hypoth. perf., but as the part. deprehensus), may make compensation for this crime. The fut. ישׁלּם thus to be understood as the potential lies near from this, that a sevenfold compensation of the thing stolen is unheard of in the Israelitish law; it knows only of a twofold, fourfold, fivefold restoration, Ex. 21:37; Exodus 22:1-3, Exodus 22:8 (cf. Saalschtz, Mos. Recht, p. 554ff.). This excess over that which the law rendered necessary leads into the region of free-will: he (the thief, by which we are now only to think of him whom bitter necessity has made such) may make compensation sevenfold, i.e., superabundantly; he may give up the whole possessions (vid., on הון at Proverbs 1:13) of his house, so as not merely to satisfy the law, but to appease him against whom he has done wrong, and again to gain for himself an honoured name. What is said in Proverbs 6:30 and Proverbs 6:31 is perfectly just. One does not contemn a man who is a thief through poverty, he is pitied; while the adulterer goes to ruin under all circumstances of contempt and scorn. And: theft may be made good, and that abundantly; but adultery and its consequences are irreparable.

Despise - Abhor, but rather pity him.