Reflection And Reconstruction Of The Responsibility Structure Of Unit Crime

With the rapid development of the economy, with the aid of in the name of the unit and the power of the crime after another and form tends to diversification, of economic development and social stability caused serious harm, the state to increase efforts to crack down on the phenomenon of unit crime, in 1997, "criminal law" in the unit crime concept arises at the historic moment. But on the whole, the introduction of unit crime more is the judicial practice point and the lack of appropriate theoretical support, can be said to be national crime unit to deal with the chaos and in theory is still immature premise "premature". From the unit crime affirmative and negative) on the dispute can be seen, the theories of crime committed by a unit has been in a unit crime law of chasing the role, until the "criminal law" comprehensive regulations voluntarily withdraw from the dispute of unit crime, for the problem of the source of the unit crime form and structure, the responsibility on the basis of the still failed to get a reasonable explanation. Even scholars research center have turned to seeking to solve the problem of unit crime in judicial practice, showing a unit crime theory contends that the prosperity, also cannot cover the unit crime origin, the premise of the theory of lack of reality. And this also directly led to the legislative and judicial practice on the unit crime in the production of a lot of confusion. The legislation, the legislative provisions of the concept of the unit crime is ambiguous, only the provisions of the declaration of the concept and is not specific to the scope of unit crime to be clarified; provisions on a unit crime punishment system, and double penalty of the members of the unit imposed than ordinary natural person crime lighter penalty provisions lack of theoretical support, also caused the many unreasonable phenomenon. In judicial practice, due to the legislation is too general, resulting in law enforcement in the face of unit crime is too "prudent", often unable to start, because there is no unified conclusion on the morphology of the unit crime, the crime of natural person crime this situation produces different processing pathways, also caused the supreme people’s court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate issued some about the unit crime judicial interpretation, approved the contradictory, is incompatible with the mainstream academic theory, resulting in a great controversy, to the judicial practice caused more trouble. So the author thinks that we should not shackles to solve the problems in the judicial practice, but should be from the morphological structure of the unit crime premise of formed unified throughout the theory system and logic structure, to guide the legislation and judicature. 2014 April the 12 th session of the National People’s Congress Standing Committee passed the unit crime legislative interpretation, the interpretation clearly defined "behavior of companies, enterprises, institutions, agencies, organizations and other units to implement the provisions of the criminal law and harm to the society, the provisions in the specific provisions of criminal law and other laws not specified chasing the criminal responsibility of the research unit, the organization, planning, implementation of human behavior that harms the society shall be investigated for the criminal responsibility". The introduction of the legislative interpretation not only answer the question of how the unit does not constitute the crime of unit crime, but also more attention is the legislative interpretation of the value of the legislators behind. The author believes that the legislators through legislative interpretation to convey to us a unit of organization and unit members of each other independent thinking, that is, the responsibility of the two separate from each other, not for the premise. But we can not infer the possible existence behind the legislative interpretation of the position that we should choose the theory of separation, but should weigh the advantages and disadvantages of traditional ideas and separation of the pros and cons before making a choice.This paper is divided into five parts, the first part of the theory of unit crime history reveals the unit crime is a result of the gap between theory and practice, the lack of theoretical support for a unified origin through, will produce many legislative and judicial predicament; the second part introduces and analyzes the scholars of various theories about the unit crime responsibility the structure, and by the introduction of the new legislative interpretation which may contain the theory of separation logic; the third part analyzed the academic mainstream of the subject of the unit crime monism, with many difficulties existing in the unit crime, that can not only solve the monism of unit crime existing problems, and will generate more disputes; fourth part of the responsibility of the unit crime on the position of separation were introduced, and the analysis of the existing theory of rationality and Practice For that which not only with the legislative interpretation of value fit, can also solve the conclusion of most of the unit crime related dilemma. Compared with the traditional point of view, which displays the advantages of obvious, we should choose the position. The fifth part, the author along the separation of logic, from the aspects of the interpretation of the concept of the unit crime, standard of prosecution and punishment system of unit crime legislation proposed reasonable suggestions for the perfection and development.