Research On The Issue Of Surplus Behavior

Surplus Behavior is a very common and challenging crime problem in the study of practiced theory. Whether in the definition, in the constituent elements, in specifically identified, or in criminal responsibility, there is much to be researched. In judicial practice, along with large numbers of cases in common crime and the growing complexity of the case, practiced limit has become a priority in the judicial staff. Practiced limit is a special form of crime which not only arises from common crime, but also is closely linked to it. Therefore, it is likely to be confused with each other. Thus, there is particular significance in how to identify common crime.Looking through the legislative and judicial systems around the world, Civil law countries with continental law system such as Japan, Germany, and Russia have already done very in-depth study. Some countries even have written the practiced limited into the Criminal Code. Common law countries also have put forward predictable principles on identification of practice limit theoretically. Unfortunately, criminal law scholars in China have not reached a consensus yet on the identification of practice limit. And there is no relevant regulation on practice limit given by criminal legislation. Thus conclusions with great differences are often emerged after the procedures of identification of practice limit and criminal liability, which directly result into a large number of miscarriages of justice. Hereon, after careful consideration, the author try to put forward some views and opinions to seek for an accurate and unified identification on practice limit, which would contribute to the judicial practice hopefully.Surplus Behavior as a legal term, after analyzing the definition of it which is provided by domestic and foreign scholars, the author believe the so-called practice limit referring to the criminal pattern that in the process of joint crime, because of the deliberate crime intention the actor acts beyond the joint criminal intention scope. By further analysis, from perspectives of subject, subjectivity and objectivity the author elaborates the important elements of practice limit. In addition, via referencing the existing domestic and abroad identification theory on practice limit, the author discusses Guilty of the common practice, organization, abettors, to help offenders into committed, and the consequential offense practiced in the limited,one by one in the way of concrete analysis. By analysis on the criminal liability of practice limit, the author raises some suggestions on legislation of practice limit in China. This paper emphasizes and aims to discuss identification of practice limit in a variety of situations as well as the criminal liability of the actor.