Study On Crime Of Traffic Accident

The serious injuries, deaths and heavy damage of public or private property caused by traffic accident, have been noticed by more and more people. The research is of great value both in theory and practice. And in the practice, on one hand, traffic accident causes great losses to country, society and people; on the other hand, transportation facility and the idea of people, serious traffic accident, because of the means of transport, will be seen in the long period of the future. But there are some problems in the verdict of this crime. In the theory, since Feuerbach finished his monument work " the textbook of intentional crimes and act crimes. From this angle, traffic accident crime is a new kind of crime, its theoretical difficulty lies in, and it not only involves in the problem of negligent crime and crime of omission, but also disputes about "running away from the spot after he has caused a traffic accident" and "his escape resulting in the death of another person" bring people the deep confusion as well deep understanding.This dissertation is divided into five chapters. Chapter One explores general principles of traffic crime , mainly discusses the concept and history of the crime of traffic ,and compares difference between its legislations . With regard to the concept of crime of traffic , scholars in criminal law have not acquire consistent opinion. Firstly, is the body of crime of traffic special, or persons undertaking transportation? The author thinks that the body of the crime of traffic is general. The reason is that ,compared to 1979 criminal law, 1997 criminal law has cancelled distinguishing between person undertaking transportation and person not undertaking transportation, as long as infringing on regulation of traffic, and causes some person GBH .death or great loss of property, the conduct will be regarded as a crime. Secondly, does the conductor infringe regulations of traffic or regulations of transportation? There are no distinction in literalmeaning and cannot cause substantive influence ,regardless of anyone accepted. Based on that ,the author adopts the expression of "infringing on regulations of transportation". In a word, the author educes that the crime of traffic is the conduct that person undertaking transportation or not, infringes regulations of transportation, takes place serious accident ,and causes some person GBH, death or great loss of property.Chapter Two mainly researches on the joint crime of traffic accident. It mainly discusses the basic theory on the establishment of joint crime in traffic accident and gives a concrete analysis on the judicial interpretation about joint creme in the traffic accident. We would demonstrate it in two aspects, firstly, crime of traffic accident may be indirect intention, except of negligence, with other words, ihe offence form is a compound form, but we can use crime of traffic accident to convict and sentence a serious traffic accident, first of all, crime of traffic accident may be made up by, indirect intention. The emotional factor in it is one factors in man's subjective feelings, we would use the positive emotion, negative emotion and vague emoting to analyze the offence mentality, .Moreover man's mentality is made up of apparent awareness and dormant awareness. The mental process is a active process, a process of the joint function by apparent and dormant awareness. In the sense, we can't absolutely ascribe readily believe negligence to apparent awareness of dormant awareness. We believe that dormant awareness acts controlling effect in readily believe negligence, and in a result, both readily believe negligence and allow mingle together. In readily believe negligence, man's knowledge about harmful circumstance is abstract, not concrete. When the abstract danger comes to the concrete danger, man's mentality little by little turn to intention from negligence. So crime of traffic accident generally is made up of negligence, but it also is made up of indirect intention in particular circumstance. Secondly, traditional theory about the difference between indirect intent and readily believe negligence can't deal with the thing perfectly. On the basis of drawing lessons from America and France, the necessity and reality of the compound offence could be tested so the offence form of crime in traffic accident is a compound offence.The concrete analyses of joint crime of in traffic accident in the judicial interpretation mainly revolves two questions: instigators don't conclude the passengers, but we believe that it is a fault; It isn't true to ascribe the act to have been stipulated by judicial interpretation in fifth article, second clause to joint crime of crime of traffic accident.Chapter Three Studies the stipulation of responsible transformation in the judicial interpretation. And we believe that the stipulation confuse the limitation between criminal responsibility and civil responsibility, so it is shot of the support of jurisprudence and legislation,.Moreover, it may cause the destruction to the principal of equality. Criminal responsibility and civil responsibility can't transform each other, because apparent differences exist. The two responsibility are completely different and can't transform each other. Otherwise, the criminal law will wrongly regulate the civil law relations, and the innocent will be sentenced; if the man's offence has violate the criminal law, he will not be sentenced under a pretext that he has assumed the civil responsibility,. Then it will indulge the man who is guilty. In the end, we don't believe that the compensation will realize the crime's criminal responsibility. Compensation in article 37 of criminal law is different from civil compensation,because compensation in the Judicial interpretation is civil compensation, not a way to realize the criminal responsibility by anon-punishment way.The assumption of penal liability should not be based on the condition of civil liability. Firstly, the judicial interpretation lay as the advance of condition crime and penal liability whether the accident-causer can meet the civil damage compensation liability or not. It change and enlarge the legality of traffic-accident-causing crime.Secondly the interpretation represent other than the principle of priority of compensation liability in penal law and the principle of priority of the creditor's rights, which aims to protect the private right of citizen, but not likely to result in replacement of criminal liability, Lastly, it is not likely itself that the conviction is based on the assumption of compensation liability. Moreover, the principle of equality is the top-first principle.Chapter Four, focuses on the problem of the escaped traffic behind of accident, regarding to the nature of traffic accident, there are two debating viewpoint. One escaped is the sentencing circumstance, often occurred in the traffic accident. The other escapade functioned itself independent to the pre-action of traffic accident in the justice. We agree that Clause 2 of Article 2 of the Interpretation, which formulated the action of escaping from the accident spot in order to shunt from the legal liability as factors of the traffic accident, have changed the nature of this crime, and somewhat intrude the legislative power.Concerning the subjective guilty of the accident cases ,when he cause homicide in comes of escapade, we think the only guilty form is negligence other than intention. And we attest this viewpoint from the whole holding of the penal law regulation and the acknowledgement that action of escaped is intent action non- penalty.Concerning the killed in the escapade, we thought that it means that the same victim of the traffic accident died of the accident instead of new death is caused in the escaped after the traffic accident.If the action of accident causing doesn't fit the essence of crime, for example, only cause one person serious injured, how to dispose of it? We think that the action of escapade should be eyed as natural continuation of the action of the traffic accident. And the analysis is carried on the starting point of anti-action theory that the stipulation of the article 6 of the interpretation is different from the regulation of penal law, which formulated as "cause homicide in cause of escapade."Chapter Five, analyses the legislative bettering of traffic accident. The standard of the compensation liability should regard to the reality. With accordance to national reality and reference to the legislative experience of relevant state, we propose the abolishment of driving quality and analyses the essentiality of driving prohibition and the adopting conditions and penal quality abolishment.