Study On The Objective Characteristics Of The Crime Of Refusing To Execute The Judgments Or Rulings Of People's Court

The actor's refusal to execute judgments and rulings has led to an increase in the “legal white stripe” phenomenon in society.It is not conducive to resolving social conflicts and improving judicial credibility,so non-compliance has became a big problem in judicial practice in China.Based on the analysis of the existing research results,this paper finds that the theoretical community has not paid much attention to the crime of refusing to execute the judgments and rulings,although it points out that this crime has problems in the determination of the object of the behavior,the performance of the behavior and the serious plot,but failed to propose an effective solution,and the relevant legislative and judicial interpretations are not clear enough.Therefore,from a theoretical perspective,it is necessary to systematically explore the objective characteristics of the refusal to execute judgments and rulings,and to solve the confusion in judicial application.The thesis consists of five parts:The first part is the legislative overview of this crime.Through a comprehensive review of the legislative development of this crime,it is found that this crime has difficulties in identifying the objective characteristics,and this is used to determine the research object of this article.The second part is research on the object of this crime.With regard to the determination of “judgments and rulings”,it adheres to the theory of substantive interpretation and points out that mediation should be the object of this crime.At the same time,for the refusal to execute special judgments and rulings on the prohibition of employment and the right of visit,a differentiated criminalization and strict criminalization system should be implemented separately.With regard to the determination of effectiveness,by strictly restricting the service of the announcement to judgments and rulings,it is determined that the actor has entered the trial process in the previous period,and thus the validity of the notice delivery document is affirmed.The third part is the study of the behavior of this crime.On the basis of distinguishing between “the theory of action” and “the theory of omission”,theoretically deconstructing the “cooperation theory”,and finally pointing out the factual acts such as violent resistance is essentially a breach of an established obligation,so the crime was found to be an omission.The fourth part is research on the performance of this crime.Specifically,it includes the judgment of behavior type,behavior time point and the determination of execution ability.It is advocated that other refusal actions in judicial practice should be judged by analyzing whether the action intuitively and directly damages the legal benefits of this crime and is essentially consistent with the refusal actions listed in the legal interpretation.The fifth part is the study of specific judgment criteria for serious plots.In light of the fact that the criteria for serious plot determination are ambiguous in judicial practice,it is pointed out that it should be strictly grasped from two aspects: the ponderance of behavior and the seriousness of results.As for “the plot is particularly serious”,this article attempts to start from the existing specific cases,and combines the regulations issued in relevant places,the number of refusals,the amount of refusal and the social influence,to give the “special plot”identification criteria.