Research On Correspondence Offense

Correspondence offense is a special type of indispensable co-offender. In China, the problem on correspondence offense does not yet have a complete in-depth analysis and research. But in specific provisions of criminal law contains a large number of correspondence offense crime, and there are a considerable number of the judicial interpretation which is closely related with the issue of correspondence offense. Also in the judicial practice, there are some difficult problems about dealing with the correspondence offense. On the base of the uncoordinated situation between the theory and practice of the legislative and judicial, this paper is having an in-depth study on the key points and difficult problems of the correspondence offense from the following six parts.Part I: Integrating some representative views home and abroad on the definition of the correspondence offense, this part is deeply analyzing the essential characteristics of the correspondence offense, which is correspondence relation. On this basis, it sums up the concept of correspondence offense.Part II: Classifying the correspondence offense on different standards. One is in accordance with the different Appraisal to correspondence offense in specific provisions of criminal law, which are the same punishment type, different crime and different punishment type, and one-side punishment type. I also made a further study on the legislative theory why it is treated differently in the criminal law. The other one is in accordance with the standard on the difference of the correspondence offense behavior, which is transaction type, bribe type and others.Part III: Closely linked to the criminal rules and judicial interpretation of criminal law, this part is focusing on the issue that if behavior of both parties can form the accomplice of correspondence offense. Among them, the most significant part is that in one-side punishment type, can the correspondence behavior from one side be judged as the accomplice of the other side? In my opinion, one side behavior in the correspondence actions should not be punished in principle, only when their actions go beyond the stereotype of correspondence action in the constitutive requirements of the specific crime.Part IV: Researching on the intermediary behavior of correspondence offense. First define the concept of intermediary behavior. Classify it into pure intermediary behavior and impure intermediary behavior. Then discuss the general principles and specific cases in punishing the intermediary action (introduced bribery). Finally, discuss some difficult problems in punishing the intermediary behavior of correspondence offense in the judicial practice.Part V: Combining the doctrine and judicial cases, this part mainly discusses the accomplished standard of the correspondence offense. For the business type of the correspondence offense, the standard is to hand over the subject matter. But the crime of abduction and sale of women and children is as an exception. The standard for this is to shift the victims to the control of the perpetrator or the third person. The bribe type of the correspondence offense, the accomplished standard of the bribe is if he or she has taken the bribe. However, there is a mixed standard for the bribery, which is paying the national staff in reality and the meaning of seeking the improper profit has been conveyed to the national staff. For the other types of the correspondence offense, the accomplished standard is the achieving time in different constitutive requirements of crime.Part VI: The last part of the article is about the self-accusation of the correspondence offense. With the same punishment on the correspondence offense, the perpetrator should both confess his or her crimes and the behavior of the correspondence side. Different crimes and different punishment correspondence criminals, they should do the same. For the one-side penalty correspondence offense, the perpetrator may only confess their own crime to establish the self-accusation.