The Judicial Cognizance Of Defiance And Affray Crime

Defiance and affray crime comes from the crime of hooliganism in the Criminal Law of1979. It was a crime separated from the hooliganism and a Chinese unique crime. In the judicial practice, it was a multiply crime with controversial and indiscernible,so it was called pockets crime by the legal workers. In fact, lawmakers adopted the "ambiguity" expression set its indictment and it make the defiance and affray crime with a great deal of uncertainty. Based on this uncertainty, a lot of problems in judicial practice appears and made the judicial cognizance of the defiance and affray crime in a dilemma. Meanwhile, scholars are at a no end debate about the defiance and affray crime. The first case that defiance and affray crime of Zhang xin yue in the SARS of2003. The case Fang zhou zi-attacked of2010.The son of Chinese military singer beating. The child abuse incident in Wenling. The first arrest on spreading rumours or misinformation online about a16-year-old boy in Gansu. After the news report, more and more attention put on it, including legislators. Starting with concept of defiance and affray crime, the article discusses the constitutive elements of defiance and affray crime in terms of object infringed by the crime and subjective factors.Compared with the original hooliganism, defiance and affray crime has made a certain progress in legislation. There are more clearly on the description of the behavior, more specific in terms of the crime, more reasonable on the master of punishment sentencing. It articles the crime and lack of uniform standards in the judicial practice. Then, many difficult come. In order to solve these problems, a big legislative progress achieved in the criminal law amendment (eight). One is that putting the threaten into criminal punishment. The other is that adding to aggravated offense by circumstances. All of this enrich the content further. The crime judicial explanation of2013about defiance and affray crime play a more important role in the judicial practice.The study focused on the judicial cognizance of defiance and affray crime from three aspects, behavior characteristics, object and cognizance. In the article, first, I identified the behavior characteristics for the defiance and affray crime. The analysis about the objective elements is necessary. The author explains each of the four convictions behavior and circumstances of the defiance and affray crime, hoping that it can be useful in the judicial practice. But, how to determine the random of this crime, in my view, it should be based on most people’s standards. I believe that must be in the same external circumstances and conditions, in accordance with the crime of human reason, whether the assault was generally understood and accepted.Next, the author discuss the object about the crime. According the cases, we all know the fact that defiance and affray crime has brought serious threat to the social public order and the citizens’personal safety. It is a great difference. The Security Administration Punishment Act provides the illegal behavior up fights and causing troubles. In my opinion, the object of the defiance and affray crime is not only the public order or personal property, but also the Complicated one. I call it the public order plus X. X has different meanings. It shows personal rights and property rights and so on. Sometimes it means nothing. The public order plus X is a new the object identified patterns combined with the specific case.Last, the author studies the boundaries between the similar crime and defiance and affray crime. In this part, I discusses of the main the defiance and affray crime with the problem of defining the crime of intentional injury, robbery, extortion crime, intentional destruction of property crimes, assembling a crowd to disturb order in public places. In this section, I also reiterated the complementary nature of the defiance and affray crime, with other crime definition, for certain cases I advice that a heavier punishment is suitable.