Disposition Of Error In Cognition Of Irregularity

The problem of cognition of irregularity relate to The disposition for error in cognition of irregularity. The thesis draw lessons from German and Japanese theoretics of criminal law to search the method of disposition for error in cognition of irregularity.Part I deal with comment on German and Japanese theoretics of cognition of irregularity. There are formal irregularity and virtual irregularity in German and Japanese theoretics of criminal law, which is the key of understand the different theory of cognition of irregularity, the theory of responsibility separte the cognition of irregularity from the criminal intent, and think that the cognition of irregularity is independent element of responsibility, the theory is in keeping with the German and Japanese system of criminal law. Compared with other theories, There are lots of advantages in the theory.Part II deals with our country's theories of cognition of irregularity. The cognition of irregularity in our country's criminal law is the cognition of legal norm, the cognition of irregularity in our country is equal to formal irregularity in Germay and Japan. We replace the cognition of virtual irregularity with the cognition of harmfulness of the society. There is no controversy over different opinions about irregularity. The author think that there are much malady in the several theories about cognition of irregularity.Part III deals with my opinions about the cognition of irregularity. The reasons for controversy about the cognition of irregularity in German and Japanese criminal law are complicated : In the first, the German and Japanese scholars have differentopinions about irregularity. In the second, the German and Japanese scholars have different theoretical systems of crime;. In the last, They have different comprehend about responsibility. The author deem that there are not identical between the cognition of irregularity and the cognition of harmfulness of the society. The cognition of harmfulness of the society is the element of criminal law. If one person know his behavior is irregular. We can firmly believe than his action is calculated crime. It is not essential for cognition of irregularity. His action set up negligent crime, because of his negligence or readily believes. If a person don't have the possibility of cognition of irregularity or there are no specification about negligent crime. We can not deem that his action is a crime.