Justification Of The Non-financial Fraud To Death

Non-violent crimes and death penalty have been increasingly becoming an extremely inappropriate issue in the current world. On one hand,the abolition of death penalty has become an inevitable tendency around the world; On the other hand, even in those countries where death penalty is still preserved, it principally only applies to gross violent, such as despite to national security, public security and life right. However China is an exception, which not only prescribes plentiful death penalty on the violent crime, but also one of few countries who applies it to non-violent crimes nowadays. It’s not only comply with China’s international good image, but also does not comply with the policy of death penalty that should be used as less and carefully as possible which is always advocated and permanently maintained by China. Wu Ying case which caused a big discussion around the society in2012led this issue onto the air waves. Face to this controversial topics that the abolition of death penalty of the non-violent crimes in China, this paper concentrates on the justification of the death penalty of fraudulent fund-raising. Through analyzing the crime of fraudulent fund-raising, we want to investigate whether the justification of the death penalty of fraudulent fund-raising or not. Apply comprehensively the principle of criminal law, along the way that from theory to practice, this paper is divided into five parts: The first part is "Introduction", it’s analyzes Wu Ying fraudulent fund-raising case which directly induces people’s attention on the death penalty in fund-raising fraud, so as to expand this article; the second chapter describes the legislative history, concepts and specific penalty of the crime of fraudulent fund-raising. The discussion of this part include the social reasons why the penalty of the crime of fraudulent fund-raising from the blank to the highest death penalty. The third part describes the controversy about justification of the death penalty of fraudulent fund-raising in Academic. This comment leads to a viewpoint that the death penalty of the crime of fraudulent fund-raising is non-justification. The fourth part as a discussion of the focus of this article from the point of view of retribution, utilitarianism, and combine with concrete social reality, leads to the viewpoint that the death penalty of the crime of fraudulent fund-raising is non-justification. The last part specifically discussed the death penalty alternative measure of the crime of fraudulent fund-raising. Death penalty alternative measure is a problem which must face after a crime that abolition of the death penalty. This part through analyzing the characteristics that the death penalty alternative measures must have, come to a conclusion that according to China’s current Criminal Code, it’s practicable to use life imprisonment to replace the death penalty of the crime of fraudulent fund-raising. Although the life imprisonment in our current Criminal Code has a shortcoming that lack of severe, but in China life sentence is the severest punishment apart from death which, if reformed appropriately, will have as much deterrent effect as capital punishment. It is of great importance to fix a minimum term before granting clemency. By reference of foreign experiences, a10years minimum term is held the choice. Finally, according to the nature and reality of the crime of fraudulent fund-raising, combined with the actual situation in China, come to a conclusion that use life imprisonment to replace the death penalty of the crime of fraudulent fund-raising, on this basis in order to reach the relative balance between the crime.