Immanuel Kant - Lying, Cheating, and Stealing

Since I, Immanuel Kant, tried to conclude very different way about right things to do, my theory on ethic become a non-consequentialist thoery. This means I concluded that moral choices must be judged, not by their consequences, but by the good will of the moral agent. Even When I try to apply this ethical question to my theory, or when I don't, the conclusion appears very differently. If normal people see this question, they would fisrt conclude the lying, cheating, and stealing is morally bad. But, on my view, this question can be thought very differently, because of the significance of my theory that relates to this question. On my view, moral, right thing to do, are determined, and judged by good will of moral agent. Good will means that the only things for its own sake. When I apply this thoery to the question, I can conclude that the moral in this question is determined by the humans' nature of morality, and its humanity. And this conclusion can be divided by two ways. When a human's nature who is lying, cheating, and stealing is good, according to the good will of moral agent, this man would stop lying , cheating, and stealing by his human nature of good morality. But, when a man's nature of morality is bad, he wouldn't stop lying, cheating, and stealing, which the a man's nature of bad morality became the circumstances that is unchangeable.