Defend The Defense Intention In The Defense

Self-defense is a fundamental system of criminal law, but in judicial practice, constitute the conditions for self-defense, particularly subjective element to understand properly, resulting in many acts of self-defense to be treated as a crime, making it difficult to effectively play the role of self-defense system. With the relaxation of the requirements of self-defense recognized by growing louder, there is a profound study of the elements necessary to constitute self-defense.Based on the results worthless stance and support ’defensive intent Do not say, "advocated the defense should be excluded from the intent of the essential constituent elements of self-defense. The first part lists the judicial practice more controversial cases, such as "Jiangsu Changshu fight the case," and the judicial practice of "cause responsibility" to distinguish between single-mode and injuries to defensive Comments to clarify the intent of the abuse led to the defense of self-defense judicial plight.The second part sets out the first national legal provisions for self-defense, and to analyze trends in national legislation and jurisprudence, the subjective element in self-defense gradually fade; Secondly, based on the theoretical justification of self-defense systems reviewed herein considered "superior Interest" more logical persuasive; Furthermore herein profound relatively ’defensive intent necessary to say "and" Do not say defensive intent, "" defensive intent necessary to say "can not explain the instinctive behavior and purpose is not clear counterattack defense behavior, and compromise." Defence said the intention of understanding "the concept of negative split defense purposes, essentially the ’defensive intent not to say" no different from article 20 of the Penal Code, "in order to" provisions can be interpreted as indicating the cause, such as a criminal Law "to punish crime" "defense intent not to say" more in line with the needs of practice and theory.The third part describes the negative defensive intentions more conducive to the realization of self-defense theory of self-government. This paper discusses the overall fault unjustifiable self- defense and self-defense issues, on the one hand, to prevent unlawful infringement of wrongdoing in practice is composed of self-defense, but there is no negligence defensive intent, with the traditional "defensive intent necessary to say" theoretical contradictory; on the other hand, over-defense to self-defense as the premise, if we insist on "defensive intent need to say," then defended when people are having a defensive intent, the sin should generally defined as negligence, and in the actual defense too when the case, the defense set the basic human sin deliberately. This paper compares the various theories, drawn negative defensive intent of this requirement is necessary, in line of legality. The establishment of objective and subjective elements of crime requires complete, denied a crime only negative element, as a self-defense law negates the subject should not be used to incriminate standard elements complete. Even based on behavior unworthy dualism, illegal illegality included objective and subjective illegal, it may not come to self-defense must also have a legitimate objective and subjective legitimate, there is the effect of that is the defense negates the unlawful objective, it has does not have the objective illegality.The fourth part discusses the significance of the negative impact of defense-related intent on self-defense system, mainly from the provocation defense, melee defense and accidental behavior three aspects. Defense can not provoke the establishment of self-defense, defense of the traditional view on the grounds that provoke people lack defensive intent of this article based on the "defense of intent not to say," Analytical illegality "abuse of rights", "the free exercise of reason to say" that provoke defense commitments recognized unlawful infringement, unlawful infringement lost urgency of self-defense can not be established. Melee behavior is generally not constitute self-defense, on the grounds that participation in each other’s side promised to fight the assault, are prepared in advance to fight back in self-defense does not exclude, of course, after the revolt of the chase is still possible establishment of self-defense. Occasional defense of "attempted to say" and "not guilty say" parts, "attempted to say" that the accidental presence of defense against the risk of legal interest, and not guilty of similar, but "not guilty, said" that is different from occasional defend not found guilty prevent the unlawful infringement, it should be set up self-defense.