Status Crime And Expansion In Vision Of Joint Crime

Criminal law is a kind of normal science researching on the regulation and application of criminal law. There is a knotty problem in criminal theory about accomplice and status, which is stipulated with specific articles in criminal law of continent law system. It is not stipulated in general provisions like others but stipulated with specific articles in specific provisions of the Criminal Law of People's Republic of China. According to accomplice and status, scholars have made remarkable researches and raised valuable views, but need to make a further study. The theoretical insufficiency and relative delay result to the difficulties of the legal application in judicial practice. Thus it is significant in theory and practice to study accomplice and status. It is the mainline of the thesis that the author aims to achieve the judicial justice and bases upon criminal stand of the objectivism, implements the theory of legal interest damage, and focuses on the practical interpretative views. The keynote of the thesis is"take a broad view of worldwide opinions, base upon Chinese theories". Applying the comprehensive knowledge of philosophy, sociology, jurisprudence, history and the related subjects, the author analyzes the status in vision of joint crime to draw a conclusion according with the substantial request of just idea, amplify criminal basic theory and promote the implementation of individual justice in judicial practice.It is a historical task for the different countries'criminal laws to handle accomplice and status. It is the key to the topic to inspect the source and cause of status in criminal law from legislative level, and it is the crux on the research to handle the concept and feature of status. Hence, based upon the legislative relieves of the different countries'criminal laws; the thesis analyzes the concept of status in criminal theoretical circles and interprets the concept of status. The author points out that the status in criminal law is the specific individual factors determining the existence or nonexistence of the criminal liability and the degree of criminal punishment according to the stipulation in criminal law. And the status possesses the factual feature, legal feature, time-space feature and relativity. Furthermore the author classifies the status and reveals the criminal function of status. Basing upon the comparative laws'inspection to the concept of the status crime, the author points out the status crime is a kind of crime determined by the actor's specific status, which possesses the fundamental elements of some specific crimes or legal circumstance according to the stipulation of criminal law, and analyzes the feature of status crime. The theory of legal interest damage is practically meaningful for the construction of Chinese criminal law and criminal legal system, comparing and inspecting the theory of obligation violation, legal interest damage and compromise theory in criminal law. It is necessary to establish the basic notion of crime that crime is a damage or threat to legal interest, and it is the essential basis for the existence of criminal law. In occasion of status crime, the theory of legal interest damage should be promoted and implemented. Basing upon the comparison and reference, the thesis analyzes the theoretical styles of crime status and lays the foundation for the research of next paragraphs.We should interpret and classify the foundation and basis of the punishment of accomplice in the discussion. It is the premise and method to the research, because it concerns how to clarify the relevance of accomplice and principal offender, and concerns the impact of status to joint crime. It is the key point to distinguish accomplice and principal offender in some nations'criminal theories adopting the legislation to isolating accomplice and principal offender. There are some theories about the distinction such as objective theory, subjective theory, compromise theory and theory of criminal factual domination. The thesis briefly introduces the above-mentioned theories and demonstrates the distinct standard of accomplice and principal crime in Chinese criminal law. There are some discussing theories about the essence of accomplice such as theory of common crime and theory of common conduct, theory of subordination of accomplices and theory of independency of accomplices. The author promotes the theory of partly common crime and theory of subordination of accomplices in identifying joint crime. There are different criminal theories and legislative regulations in different countries about the classification of joint crime offenders. Basing upon the comparative laws'inspection to the classification of joint crime offenders in criminal law of common law system and continental law system, the author mainly studies the classification of joint crime offenders in Chinese criminal law to scientifically and reasonably affirm the degree and burden of the joint crime offenders'criminal liability. Criminal liability is the core of criminal law and criminal law develops around the criminal liability. Hence, we should analyze the impact of status to the criminal liability of joint crime offenders in the research on status and joint crime especially the basis and method.The implementation of law is the important way to achieve the value of law. Criminal law is a practical subject publicly recognized, and criminal theory has a close relation with the criminal jurisdictional practice. The interpretative theory should be used to criminal jurisdiction and criminal theory must focus and study the being problems in criminal jurisdiction. In jurisdictional practice there are lots of cases involved the status and joint crime which criminal law must confront but not dodge. Criminal law should response and react to the practical challenge to it and its implementations. Jointing with the status theory inn criminal law, the author discusses the relations of status offenders and principal offenders, and promotes the solution to the related problems in jurisdictional practice. The particular tasks include that whether the offenders with specific status uniting and using the professional conveniences constitute joint principal offenders, the offenders with specific status uniting but not using the professional conveniences constitute joint principal offenders, non-status offenders and status offenders constitute pure status principal offenders, and how to determine the character of joint crime executed by non-status offenders and status offenders. After expounding the theory of personal committing crime in criminal law, the thesis studies the overlap of the personal committing offenders and status offenders in joint crime, and interprets the contradiction about personal committing offenders and pure status offenders in criminal theory, furthermore discusses the different circumstance of personal committing offenders and joint principal offenders in jurisdictional practice.As a vital content, the theory and system of accomplice takes an importance place in criminal theoretical system. Abettor and accessory are a vital content in the theory of accomplice and attract lots of attentions. As a major branch of the theory of accomplice and status, the research on abettor and status could helpfully determine the criminal liability of offender and be valuable to the criminal theory and jurisdictional practice. The particular tasks include the overlap of abettor and status and non-status abetted status offender. There are some complicated situations in the relations to abettor and accessory such as status offenders help non-status offenders committing crime or non-status offenders help status offenders committing crime. Crime is a legal phenomenon, social fact and objective existence. It is inevitable happened that the criminal facts recognized by accomplice are not coincident with the criminal fact committed by principal offenders in occasion of status in joint crime. The mistake in joint crime has own different character to the mistake in single crime and is more complicated. Because criminal subject is joint criminal offenders and it happens in the progress of joint crime and impacts the criminal liability and punishment. The theory of mistake is differently interpreted by common legal system and continental legal system for their different legal traditions. The theory of mistake in criminal law complicated by itself, the accomplice theory of mistake is overlapped by the theory of mistake and accomplice. It is necessarily based upon both the theory of mistake and accomplice to solve the problem in the mistake of accomplice. We need to develop the theory of mistake for the single crime to the theory of mistake for the joint crime and solve the practical problem. But the result of the application of the theory of mistake is not contradictory with the theory of accomplice. The aim of the theory of mistake of accomplice is that we should combine the theory of mistake and accomplice and solve the practical problems. The author points out, the mistake in joint crime is a situation, and it is not coincident with the reality that the joint criminal offenders know the criminal actions about the factual situation and legal consequence. The classification of the mistake of constitutional elements and the mistake of illegality cognition could clearly imply the position of mistake in the criminal system and basically cover the relevant problems of the mistake. So the thesis adopts the classification of"the mistake of constitutional elements and the mistake of illegality cognition". Based upon clarification of the related concepts, the author discusses the specific views of status and the mistake of constitutional elements, status and the mistake of illegality cognition. The thesis points out; we should study and discuss the related opinions of the mistake and status in joint crime to make a just reasonable essential conclusion, combing with the principle of dealing with the cognitive mistake in joint crime.The law goes forward through the discussion of the theories. We should study the status through the jurisdictional practice in vision of joint crime, and combine the actual cases to develop the quality of criminal theories and achieve the criminal justice. The real justice needs to be found in the real life and materialized, concretized and demonstrated. The thesis starts the researches on the status crime in joint crime in the angle of connatural status crime and legal status crime, and picks up rape crime and bribery crime as the study objectives. In the judicial affirmation to the rape crime, the thesis analyzes the character of rape crime and interprets accomplice of rape crime, combing with the real judicial cases. In the judicial affirmation to the bribery crime, the thesis also summarizes the character of joint bribery crime and points out the concrete situation of bribery crime in jurisdictional practice. After analyzing the distinction of accomplice of bribery crime and crime of introducing bribe, the author claims that the crime of introducing bribe is not necessary to exist in legislation. The act of introducing bride could be treated as the act of abettor and accessory to bribery crime, and it is not necessary to be stipulated as an isolated crime. Furthermore combing with the criminal theory and jurisdictional practice, the thesis ascertains the crime amount of joint bribery for different situations and provides references to deal with the related cases in jurisdictional practice.In brief, the status crime and joint crime is a very important issue in criminal theory, the complex and profound theory contains significant values. As the aim of criminal liability, the research on accomplice and status should impact whether we could fairly and reasonably draw the actor's criminal liability; enforce the function of social control of criminal law, protection to legal interests and human rights safeguard, and even the achievement of final humanistic cares of law. However there is not a coincident view about the research and discussion of accomplice and status both in the criminal theory and judicial practice. The bewildering or even absence of the criminal basic standpoint is one of the major reasons for this situation that there are lots of divergences, controversial views and ignorance of the substantial notion of justice. The method of work that criminal interpretation loses the guidance of criminal notion, will lead to the blindness of criminal interpretation and the controversial phenomenon, which the real conclusion is not coincident with criminal notion and basic standpoint. Hence, in the systematic research on criminal law it is the first task to establish the basic criminal standpoint (or criminal notion), as the basis of the interpretation and research.