Study On Occasional Defense

There exist necessary cognition of defense theory and unnecessary cognition ofdefense theory on determining the nature of accidental defense. Based on twodifferent standpoints: invalid consequence theory and invalid behavior theory, itcomes to the conclusion that accidental defense may commit crime or not. Thecriminal experts have created a fierce controversy over whether accidental defenseshould have defense consciousness. Necessary cognition of defense theory holds thatsubjective factor is very importance to judge if the behavior is legal. On the contrary,unnecessary cognition of defense theory holds the opposite opinion.Unitary invalid consequence theory believes that accidental defense does notharm the legal interests. One version considers that accidental defense does not causeharmful results, so it is justifiable defense. Another version considers that althoughaccidental defense does not cause harmful results, it causes dangerous results. It iscriminal attempt. binary invalid consequence theory includes innocent theory andabortive theory about accidental defense. Innocent theory admits that justifiabledefense need cognition of defense and accidental defense is not justifiable defense;however, accidental defense may not commit crime because it does not cause serioussocial harmfulness. Abortive theory is a compromise compared with other theorieswhich not only admits accidental defense should have cognition of defense but alsoemphasizes accidental defense cause consequence. Both theories are controversialbecause unitary invalid behavior theory is based on subjectivity, two versions doesnot take the firm stand on accidental defense. binary invalid behavior theory isdivided into accomplished theory and abortive theory. Accomplished theory believesthat accidental defense is caused by subjective consciousness which commits crime.Abortive theory is divided into two theories: One theory pays attention to thesignificance of invalid behavior theory; another theory is abortive theory which isallowed to be quoted. Through analyzing different processing modes, the paperbelieves binary invalid behavior theory is more reasonable on studying the accidental defense. Nevertheless, the above theories are unacceptable on judging accidentaldefense.This paper holds the opinion that subjective factor is useful in determiningwhether the behavior commit crime. By analyzing three results caused by accidentaldefense, it comes to the conclusion that the protective result can not attribute toaccidental defense. Accidental defense belongs to accomplished invalid consequence.Otherwise, the dangerous result caused by accidental defense actually exists.Accidental defense also belongs to abortive invalid consequence. Therefore, all theabove theories related to determining the nature of accidental defense are not quiteexact.In the end, this paper is in favor of invalid behavior theory on judging illegality.Combining binary invalid behavior theory and illegality caused by accidental defense,the writer holds the opinion that intentional accidental defense is establishedaccomplished crime; on the contrary, unpremeditated accidental defense does notcommit crime.