Constitution And Judicial Determination Of The Crime Of Provocation Beating Type

The1997"Criminal Law" section293defines the stir up trouble crime.The charges ofhooliganism isolated from1979"Criminal Law" under Article160,and the title has beencalled "little pockets crimes"for a long time.Because the1997"Criminal Law" section293ofthe four charges under the provisions of the behavior more broadly,and "random""roguemotivation" and other expressions also involves people’s subjective value judgmentscontent.Law stipulates is often confused with similar offenses in judicial practice,or difficultto distinguish,and leading to disagreement on the qualitative analysis of certain cases. So it isdifficult for the judicial practice.In this article the author discusses assault andbattery.Distinguish the beating type affray crime and the crime of intentional injury,especiallyin the distinction of beating others causing minor injuries has always been the focus of thecircles of theory and Practice.The criminal law is to protect people’s rights,and the criminallaw is to protect the legitimate rights of criminal suspects.Beating type crime and the crime ofintentional injury is a common multiple crimes,if the resolution is not clear either preventcrime, or violations of the legitimate rights and interests of others,therefore, distinguish thebeating type affray crime and the crime of intentional injury has important theoreticalsignificance and practical significance.This paper has four parts:The first part: the basic situation of the case and the differences of opinion of thecase.There are two kinds of views for this case,dispute reason in how to solve the crime ofprovocation "random beating", defiance and affray crime is rogue motivation as necessary.The second part: theoretical analysis of related issues.In this part, it is the analysis ofdifferent points of controversy,and is"random""beating"’s meating;To have a roguemotivation is or not the necessary condition for stir up trouble crime;Distinguish the beatingtype affray crime and the crime of intentional injury.The third part: conclusion case analysis.Combined with the second part of the analysis ofthe legal to give a judgement for the focus of controversy.That does not accord with stir up trouble crime conclusion.The fourth part: the case of enlightenment.By the circumstances of the case thejustificatory,Combined with the specific legal theory, summarizes the types of cases to theenlightenment.