Is There a Difference in the Definition of Complete and Stoichiometric Combustion?
Stoichiometric, theoretical or complete combustion, is the idealized process where a hydrocarbon is completely reduced to carbon dioxide and water, consuming oxygen (or, if other elements are present, they get all also oxidated, like sulphur compounds yielding sulphur dioxide, but as you can see, not to its maximum oxidation state, sulphur trioxide is not produced in real combustions)

It is called stoichiometric for obvious reasons, stoichiometric amounts of the hydrocarbon and oxygen / water carbon dioxide are consumed / generated. It is supposed to be a complete reaction.

But is also called theoretical, because it does not take place like that in real life. In practice, long hydrocarbon chains do not break down completely as efficiently as it's expected, subproducts are obtained, not only carbon dioxide is formed, but also carbon monoxide, unburned elemental carbon and like in every chemical reaction, it does not proceed to completion.

Also, if there is not enough oxygen (not at least an stoichiometric amount), incomplete combustion takes place, yielding almost exclusively carbon monoxide (toxic stuff).
In some cases, such as the fuels combustion processes, another process called pyrolysis, occurs before combustion. In this incomplete combustion, products of pyrolysis remain unburnt and important contaminants are produced, like the product of partial oxidation of ethanol can produce acetaldehyde, which is really toxic (Considerably small LD50) and very very flammable (flash point under 0 Celsius degrees).