Study On Criminal Responsibility Of Drunk Dirver

In May2011, the Amendment of Criminal Law (8) which has some provisions ofdangerous driving was implemented formally, but in the process “drunken driving” is stillexperiencing many problems in the judicial application. There is a great difference on thediscretion of “drunken driving” between the academic groups, and in judicial practice thepenalty measurement of “drunken driving” also differs in one occasion and another. Somecourts regard “drunken driving” with severe consequences just as traffic accident crime, andgive mitigated punishment.While other courts will classify it as crimes against public securityand give death penalty. Different regions with different punishment not only make publicconfused, but also impaired the seriousness and authority of the administration of justice.In such a background, using the researching method of theory and case studies, thispaper discusses the degree on criminal liability of “drunk driving” from the crime constitutiontheory and the theory of criminal responsibility, to clarify the “drunk driving” clause’sconnotation and its specific application, which help to give accurate criminal liability of drunkdriving to offenders and unite the standard of the judicial discretion.Besides the introduction part, there are five other parts of about24,000words.The introduction part describes the social dangers of drunken driving, the governance ofdrunken driving after it writing into law and theoretical and practical significance of drunkdriving criminal liability.Relating to several cases of drunken driving with the larger social impact, the first parttakes a comparative analysis of the differences in judicial practice, trying to explore thereasons of these differences and make some new points.Drunken driver have to bear criminal liability before their conduct constitutes a crime.Therefore, the second part of the paper, based on the crime theory, viewing from the angle ofcore element of the crime constitution, describes the necessary subjective elements andobjective elements of the drunken driving crime.The third part, under the premise of drunken driving constituting a crime, discusses thepresence or absence of criminal responsibility of the physiological intoxicated and thementally ill persons. According to the standard of whether the actor having the ability ofidentification or not when commiting a crime, this paper analyzes the specific circumstances of bearing criminal responsibility.Part IV discusses how to recognize the criminal liability of drunk driving. In this section,I first described issues related to the drunken standards and their application, and then analyzemany factors that affect the criminal responsibility. And then it concluded that the degree ofcriminal responsibility should be judged in consideration of all the circumstances of the case.In the last part of this paper, the author analyses the criminal liability of the drivers inseveral cases of drunken driving by applying the criminal theory. Then a conclusion is arrivedthat drunken driving commits a crime in principle but judging from the exception provision ofthe Criminal, drunken driving should be determined to be a crime by considering theseriousness of the circumstances. If the act is obviously minor, it will not be deemed a crime.The liability of drunken drivers who constitute a crime should be evaluated comprehensivelyfollowing the principle of correspondence between subjectivity and objectivity. Moreover, weshould adopt the methods of not only criminal penalty but also non-criminal penalty toprevent the crime of drunken driving according to the principle of suiting penalty to crime andcriminal responsibility.