Research On The Accomplishment Of Behavioral Offense

Behavioral offense is one of crime types generally accepted bymodern criminal law theory. Behavioral offense makes up certainproportion in the regulation of criminal law in every country.Especially nowadays as social standard idea and the awareness ofsocial defense , the criminal legislation is fruited the retributiondoctrine again by the simplicity and changed towards the direction ofand concurrently adopts the behavior and prevents the thought, Howto appraise and explain this crime type then, is an important subjectfaced by theory worker, On the basis of criminal law clause and fulladoption of research related to behavioral offense ,in the law field athome and abroad ,this paper illustrates the definition of behavioraloffense ,and the relationship between criminal defense and theaccomplished shape of several other crimes in our criminal lawtheory ,such as the distinction between consequential offense ,andhow to understand nonmaterial result as well as internationality ofbehavioral offense etc ,this paper is divided into three chapters .Chapter one, the behavioral offense's summary .The majorproblem in the research on the accomplished shape of criminaloffense is to present a correct definition of criminal offense, Thus,after comparing various kinds of definition and absorbing theirmerits , this paper defines it this way: the so-called behavioraloffense refers to the crime type where the damage action itselfcorresponding to composition terms regulated by criminal law ,subprovision can lead to the accomplished shape without damage resultor damage state . In this chapter, the author introduced six kinds ofthe theories about the definition of behavioral offense in our countryat present ,the behavioral offense and offense of action and elaboratethe six theories from three perspectives :Through the analysis of thesix theories ,it can be seen that at present our theoretical field islacking in correct understand how to differ these crime types ,inturn ,causes confusion in the definition of behavioral defense .Ifthere's no correct understanding of the definition of behavioraldefense, the research on the accomplished shape of behavioraldefense loses its foundation. As for the relation between behavioraloffense and action offense, the author thinks that they should bedistinguished in a correct way instead of being equated with eachother. The definition of the two reveals that action is one concreteform of behavior, so the author regards action offense ,and dividesbehavioral offense i.e. Behavioral offense contains action offense,and divides behavioral offense into action offense and processoffense and illustrates distinction of the two. According to the author,the biggest difference between behavioral offense and potentialdamage offense is that "potential damage "in the potential damageoffense is caused by damage action and it is the possibility ofdamaging certain external being. While infringement gains legalrights in the behavioral offense can be symbolized only by the actionitself instead of result .As for behavioral offense and consequentialoffense, the author mainly discusses nonmaterial consequentialoffense, which is usually mistaken for one offense. Through thedefinition analysis above, the author thinks that the system of theaccomplished shape in our country covers: behavioral offense(action offense and process offense), consequential offense (materialconsequential offense), potential damage offense. Among varioustheories of behavioral offense ,there exist two opposite theories–establishment theory and accomplishment theory .The opposition ofthe two sterns from contrasting understanding of patterns regulatedby criminal law clause in our ,The author thinks that our criminallaw clause is neither accomplished pattern nor establishmentpattern ,but the author claims the former should be persisted, withthe previous analysis ,the author present the definition of behavioraloffense .Chapter two, accomplished standard of the behavioraloffense. Scholars in our country hold different views towards theaccomplished criterion of crime, among which there are threepopular views, They are "crime consequence happening view",while the author claims that the three all have drawbacks .The firstfails to solve the accomplished or unaccomplished problems .inbehavioral offense and potential damage offense .The second can'tbe fully applied into many crimes .Through the third is ratherpopular and reasonable ,it has a deadly shortcoming .It presupposesthat our criminal law clause regulates accomplished pattern ,but it'sknown from the first chapter that our criminal law clause is neitheraccomplished pattern nor typical established pattern .Then how topropose a accomplished criterion for behavioral offense ?Theauthor ,from the angle of crime composition ,thinks that the majordifference between the accomplishment and unaccomplishment ofbehavioral offense depends on whether the composition actionaccomplishes ,How to correctly confirm the composition actionshould be based on criminal regulations ,with legislativeintention ,guidelines ,basic principle ,and our theories related tocomposition .It shouldn't be determined simply by some relevantregulation. However, how to understand behavioral complexity ofbehavioral offense remains rather difficult .The author attempts tofurther analyze some special behaviors in behavioral offense .First ofall it's conspiracy behavior ,Many scholars look on it as apreparatory behavior which ,after being implemented, becomescriminal preparation ,The author feels that conspiracy behavior hasserious consequence ,and it should be curbed early by means ofsevere penalty. So in many criminal laws, it's punished asaccomplishment. Later, the author further discusses the distinctionbetween immediate action in action offense and process action inprocess offense.Chapter three: several questions in the research on theaccomplishment of the behavioral offense. In this chapter, theauthor mainly discusses two questions. One is the status ofnonmaterial consequence in the research on accomplished shape ofbehavioral offense, the other is the nature of intension of behavioraloffense. The phenomenal state of criminal consequence serves as thecriterion against which materially criminal consequence andnonmaterial consequence is distinguished. People know more aboutmaterial consequence while less about nonmaterial consequence.Usually, people take the latter for one of consequential offenses.However, the author insists that nonmaterial consequence should beclassified into behavioral offense. Our criminal law defines intentionthis way: the intentional crime refers that though one is very clearthat his behavior is to do harm to society, he expects or indulges thehappening of the result. Thus he commits the crime. However,according to the definition of behavioral offense, theaccomplishment of behavioral offense doesn't demand appearance ofcriminal consequence. Then a question is aroused whether thecriminal consequence in the definition of intention in the behavioraloffense need accounting for. The author gives a negative answerbecause composition of behavioral offense doesn't regulate specificdamage consequence. Then what's the nature of intention inbehavioral offense on earth? The author thinks that intentionalrecognition factors of behavioral offense involves the following twoaspects: firstly, the doer has recognize the nature of his very behavior;secondly, the doer has to recognize legalization of his very behavior,...