A Study On Legal Nature Of Series Criminal Cases Of San Lu Milk Powder

In recent years, the incessant incidents concerning food safety in China let masses of the people broke out into a bundle of nerves. San Lu milk powder scandal is one of the most influential events. This has exposed the problems and inadequacies exist in fighting food safety crime. This paper has selected 10 cases for HeBei Province Public Security Bureau investigation as the object of study. In order to find the problems and inadequacies and methods of improvement, this paper emphatically analyses on the legal nature of the 10 cases from the judicial point of view. The full paper is divided into six parts:The first part is the introduction of the case. In the year of 2007, Zhang used melamine as raw materials to manufacture a large number of protein powder in order to posing milk protein. A part of the protein powder sold to the distributor Gao. The milk station head Geng bought the protein powder form Gao and Zhang and added to the milk. San Lu Group product and sold their milk powder in the case of understanding they contained melamine.The second part is the focus of the case. The focus of the cases is how to judge the act of the producers and the sellers of the protein powder, the milk station heads, and the San Lu Group.The third part is the disputes and different viewpoints. There are three kinds of different viewpoints mostly. The first view is that the producers and the sellers of the protein powder commit the crime of crime of endangering public security through dangerous means, the milk station heads crime of manufacturing or selling toxic foodstuff. And San Lu Group constitutes the crime of manufacturing or selling fake or inferior products. The second view holds that the producers and the sellers of the protein powder, the milk station heads constitutes the joint offence of the crime of manufacturing or selling harmful foodstuff. San Lu Group constitutes the crime of manufacturing or selling fake or inferior products and the third view is all the perpetrators constitutes the crime of manufacturing or selling fake or inferior products.The forth part is the analysis of the different viewpoints. The causes of the disputes and different viewpoints are following: one is the difference in understanding the harmfulness of melamine; the other is the difference in judging the perpetrators'subjective cognition of the harmfulness of melamine. The fifth part is the author's viewpoints. In author's opinion, the producers and the sellers of the protein powder, the milk station heads constitutes the joint offence of the crime of manufacturing or selling fake or inferior products. And San Lu Group constitutes the crime of manufacturing or selling fake or inferior products.The sixth part is the improvements about the problem. This part firstly points out the defects and deficiencies in legislative and judicial for fighting food safety crime, and then puts forward some countermeasures and suggestions.