The Question Research Of Producing And Selling Counterfeit Crime

Ni Haiqing suspected of producing and selling counterfeit crime, Since he was arrested by the public security organs,the argue have been no pause around whether he was crime or not.First instance verdict like fuel,exacerbated by controversy, the final judgment of second instance has failed drastic like fixed points only fight.On the basis of the case in detail the basic situation and the prosecution and defense arguments on that type of case, from a legal perspective depth analysis of the case and try to put forward a scientific and reasonable measures to resolve such cases, to the correct handling of such cases be beneficial. The full text of about nineteen thousand words, article is divided into three parts:Part I:Introduction of the merit and the focus of controversy. This section descripe the basic circumstances of the case, the prosecution and defense’s arguments on the case, and the first and second instance verdict and the focus of this case:First, whether the drugs involved in the case is counterfeit or not;Second, whether Ni Haiqing’s behavior are "production and sales" or not; Third,whether intentional or not on the subject; Fourth, whether the decision is in line with the principle of legality adapt or not.Part Ⅱ:Legal analysis of Ni Haiqing case. This part revolves around four focus of controversy cases,analyzed from a legal perspective. First the article analyzes of the "fake" in that standard. The drug of criminal law must have formal characteristics and essential characteristics,also is the criteria of whether the drug is fake or not, however,We should distinguish between fake of the administration and counterfeit meaning of criminal law of the sense of the regulations, The distinction is whether the mere absence of a standard form of the drug’s characteristics without serious harm to society. However, because of the drug’s potency and composition is not involved in the drug was identified as Chinese herbal medicine can not conclude whether the drug can not determine whether their behavior has serious social harm, thus, it can not be determined whether the drug is on the significance of the administrative law, or is on the significance criminal law. Secondly, the article analyzes the behavior of Ni Haiqing whether "production and sales" behavior or not. Again, the article analyzes whether the "intentional" on Ni Haiqing’s subjective. Finally, the paper analyzes the case of a judgment whether accord the principle of suiting punishment or not.Ni Haiqing has full criminal responsibility,he is also implemented the production and sale of the drug acts committed intentionally subjective,but because they can not conclude whether the drug as well as their behavior has serious social harm or not, therefore, unable to identify whether their actions constitute the production and sale of counterfeit drugs. Also, because it can not determine whether the behavior has serious social harm and the extent of the size, it can not identify the people’s court’s decision whether to adapt the principles embodied crime or not.Part Ⅲ:The study concludes of Ni Haiqing case. Analysis showed that the crux of the case is that the efficacy of the drug and the social harm they embody, thus only through scientific, rational, authoritative identification to be able to identify whether the efficacy of the drug, is able to cause serious harm to society and the degree of harm, which can address the problem, the correct referee case. Since there is no standard for the identification of the drug, so in this case we must firmly grasp the essential characteristics of the drug from the experiment to identify the practical point of view. Also, because the case has been final, to reprocess the case, you must also start the procedure for trial supervision.