The Legislative Perfection Of China’s Absichtsdelikte In Respect Of Criminal Burden Of Proof

The absichtsdelikte a type of guilty, not only account for a large proportion of theCriminal Code provisions in our country at this stage, is be occupied an importantposition in our China’s criminal law theory has long been the purpose of committing astudy, but most are concentrated in the definition of the criminal purpose statement ofthe scope of the existence of the relationship between the criminal purpose and themotive for the crime, the purpose of committing, the purpose of committing a criminalpurpose nature, but the purpose of the burden of proof for the purpose of committingexplore much, but the purpose of committing the purpose of proving the challengesfacing the judicial practice, as the special purpose of the activities of one’s heart, byvirtue of the existing science and technology is difficult to identify, but can not becausetheir escape to prove, if not solve this problem, it will bring a series of problems, suchas the statement is to solve the diiffcult burden of proof convenience evidence, judicialworkers will not solve the case under pressure and closing pressure consciouslyemphasis on confessions, confessions in vogue, at the same time can not be the purposeof the purpose of committing the burden of proof will lead substantial damage notconducive to protecting the legal interests and prevention of crime occurred. Although afew scholars specifically address this problem the author to explore the they useconstructive methods to solve the difficult problem of the purpose of the purpose ofcommitting proof is an effective method, but using constructive method, there are manyinadequacies, such as the presumption of get results only, the presumption can lead tomissing the crime problem, so this method only temporarily alleviate the plight, notsubstantially solve this problem, because the purpose of the burden of proof of thepurpose of invading the root cause of the difficulty is that the purpose of committingcriminal law provisions are not set reasonable. The purpose of the of some purposeguilty is able to reflect the degree of infringement of legal interests, or does not reflectthe degree of legal interest infringement, but set outside these purposes is guilty thecorresponding interception constituent elements, these should be the purpose ofcommitting reserved. Purpose of of some purpose guilty of not reflect the Act Infractiondegree and vague terms about the purpose, commit these purposes should be abolished;some purpose guilty should be set in the reserve on the basis of the interception ofconstituent elements, both to tight French Open, and also to make the prosecution of thepurpose of committing alleviate the purpose proof burden of proof.