Study On The Theory Of Impossible Crime

China’s current criminal law has no provisions about impossible crime, boththeoretical cycle and judicial practice also regard impossible crime as a kind ofattempted to commit for a very long time. In recent years, more and more scholarsbegan to reflect on this and consider which kind of impossible crime theory ourcountry should take. Although impossible crime is a small issue of criminal law, butthe attitudes to impossible crime can be punished or not, reflects subjective andobjective stance of a criminal law scholar, the development of impossible crimetheory, can be the most representative of the development of the basic stance of theCriminal Code, there in view of this, the paper will introduce the development of thetheory, concepts, features, and a variety of theories of impossible crime,at last theauthor will introduce the assumed facts theory which advanced by Japanese scholarsProfessor Shankouhou.Impossible crime theory was proposed by famous criminal Feuerbach, the theoryof impossible crime is the theory whether it can be punished, following Feuerbach’stheory, there also proposed a number of different theories, including subjective theory,abstract danger theory,impression theory, specific theory, objective theory andcorrectional objective theory.I think we can’t punish impossible crime because it can’t reach theaccomplishment of crime, the reason of this is that the actor’s awareness is wrong. Ithas two features. Firstly, it must have behavior, because behavior is the attention oflaw, impossible crime is can’t achieve crime instead of don’t go to crime, so thebehavior is of greatest importance. Secondly, it can’t get the Achievement of thecrime, the behavior can’t lead to any change which the criminal law pay closeattention. We must separate impossible crime and the wrong awareness, becauseimpossible crime has clear criminal intent, but the wrong awareness is the theory tosolve if there is criminal intent.Subjectivism put the core of actor of crime, and put the basis of actor’s danger character as criminal conviction, stress social standard. On the other hand,objectivism put the core of behavior or result, stress individual standard, in favor oflimiting the power of the state, so as to protecting individual freedom. In objectivismcamp, there behavior worthless theory and results worthless theory, specific theoryadvocate behavior worthless theory, other objectivism advocate results worthlesstheory, I support the view of results worthless theory, only action in violation of thecriminal law can’t be punished, only the risk of causing infringement to be punished,because the ultimate goal of criminal law is to protect the legal interests. On the basisof this, I think the assumed facts theory is of the most suitable for current criminallaw. The theory advocates that if we want to discriminate are there dangerous, wemust find the reason why it has no consequences, then we should be find under whatconditions will happen, at last, we should determine the possibility of the assumedfacts’ occurrence. The way to deal with the problem of our country is similar toabstract danger theory, but our current criminal law is objectivism, abstract dangertheory can’t meet the requirements of the development, but the assumed facts theoryadheres to an objective stance, insists on supporting the results worthless theory, ableto meet the requirements of the restraining criminal law, so it is compatible with thecurrent criminal law.