The Analysis On The Case Of An Shouji’s Intentional Injury

Justifiable defense system can encourage people to struggle against criminal behaviors to protect the public interests of the society and legitimate rights of the citizen from infringement on the one hand and deter, stop or prevent criminals from committing crimes on the other hand. Whether the victim has fault or not and how serious his fault is, to some extent, determine the level of suspect’s criminal liabilities. The crime of intentional injury shares certain characteristics with the crime of intentional killing and the accurate identification between them greatly matters the measurement of penalty. However, in China, the justifiable defense system, the influence of victim’s fault on the measurement of penalty and the identification of intentional injury and intentional killing are not adequately demonstrated yet in the criminal law or relevant judicial interpretations. Consequently, in actual justice practice, disputes often arise. In view of this, the author attempts to conduct a systematic exploration on these three aspects.The thesis is composed of three parts.The first part briefly introduces the basic details and court decision of the case of An Shouji’s intentional Injury.The second part specifically analyzes the controversial issues of the case, including whether An’s behavior counts as justifiable defense or not, whether the victim has faults and how to impact the sentencing, and define An’s behavior is intentional injury or intentional killing.The third part, on basis of exhaustive analysis on the controversial issues of the case, presents some suggestions on the limits of justifiable defense, the influence of victim’s fault on the measurement of penalty, and the identification of intentional injury and intentional killing.In short, the thesis, through the systematic analysis of An’s case, attempts to work out some beneficial suggestions on the accurate identification of justifiable defense behaviors, in the hope of providing certain reference to the adjudication of similar cases in the future.