Study On The Recognizing Errors Of Abettor

In the process of abetting crime, the recognizing errors of abettor refers to abettor’s errors of cognition of the facts of the crime the legal judgement of abetting behavior and the abettee’s acts. This kind of error of cognition which is one of the error of cognition of narrow accomplice mainly relates to the recognizing errors of abettor. So the responsibility of the recognizing errors of abettor must be restricted by the theory of accomplice. And in dealing with relevant issues, we need heavily reliant upon academic study for the legislative gaps in judicial. To solve the issues of the recognizing errors of abettor should adhere to the statutory conformation theory and the theory of the part of criminal commonness as the basic standpoint. In order to solve specific issues, we should treat the basic standpoint as the premise and combine with the related theory of accomplice.The recognizing errors of facts of abettor often occurs in cognition errors of abettor, it regards abettor as the subject, and can be divided into cognition errors of target of abettor, cognition errors of abetting scope of abettor and cognition errors of result of abettor according to the essential elements of abettor, act of perpetrating of the instigated person to influence of identification of abettor and developmental process of abetting crime. In cognition errors of target of abettor, abettor takes no criminal responsibility for criminal responsibility ability to instigate, because of instigating, the instigated person produce mens real and carry out crime, and instigation intention contain criminal intent of indirect principal, so the error don’t prevent establishment of abettor; Abettor takes others’ beforehand criminal intent for no criminal intent to instigate, because of helpful role in objectively, in subjectively instigation intention contain assistance intention, and one of establishment condition of abettor is that mens real of the instigated person is caused by solicitation actions, so it should be accessory; Abettor take do not have the crime status for having the capacity to perpetrate a status crime to instigate so that carry out having the capacity to perpetrate a status crime, because legal capacity is one of constitutive requirements in a real identity crime, the instigated person can’t realize constitution of crime without this identity, if abettor establish indirect principal with this identity. In cognition errors of abetting scope of abettor, process of cognition errors of summary fault of abettor appear beyond criminal intention, unforeseen point and so on, this paper advocates that we should refer to the results of objectivity and full consideration of the abettor of foreseen of the possibility of the result to solve this error. In cognition errors of result of abettor, abettor is based on what circumvention instigation should be punished to process for cognition errors of circumvention instigation; cognition errors of uncommitted instigating is based on abettor from duality to solve.The legal recognizing error of abettor is one of the basic types of recognizing errors. This recognizing error is mainly reflected in the recognizing error of illegality of abettor and the recognizing error of crime and penalty. The Civil law countries believe that the ignorance of the law is not exempt, but the exception is that the inevitable of the recognizing error of illegality can be resistance of the criminal intent. About the object of the recognizing error of illegality has the debate among the general law and the criminal law. The relationship of the consciousness of illegality and the criminal intent has many academic point of views such as the theory of strict intention, the theory of deliberately intention, the theory of difference, the theory of abandonment of the recognizing of illegality and the theory of responsibility. From the protection of human rights, citizens’ freedom of action perspective and according to the factors of our country’s criminal intent, the object of the recognizing error of illegality is the criminal law and the criminal intent should include the consciousness of illegality. The judgement of the abettor of the possibility of consciousness of illegality should be analyzed from the aspects of subjective and objective. If the recognizing error of illegality can be avoided, the error can’t be resistance of the criminal intent.