The Judicial Cognizance Of Intentional Injury

Intentional injury is common crime in judicial practice, intentional injury cases in the occupied large proportion of the criminal cases every year, and the social public contact, more focus on bigger crime types, therefore the research on the judicial cognizance of intentional injury is of great significance. This paper content is divided into four parts: the first part is the case description and the verdict. This section introduces the case and the trial results, etc. The second part is focus on the case analysis. According to the basic case, the writer summarizes the case to solve the problem: one is Hu Mou behavior is the nature of intentional injury, excessive defense,or murder? The second is the difference between the intentional injury and negligence deadly sin; 3 it is the difference between the intentional injury and intentional homicide, four is the difference between the intentional injury and justifiable defense,based on the theory of criminal law that xu is the behavior of intentional injury, the crime of causing death or murder?The third part is the analysis of this case involved in the criminal law theory. The first part is problem put forward to xu intentional injury as the breakthrough point, analyze the focus of dispute, the court according to the different theory and the author draw different conclusions, so justifiable defence in intentional injury cases should be how to define?The third part is the intentional injury problems that should be paid attention to in the judicial practice, the first is imaginary defense in intentional injury cases and hypothetical excessive defenseThe second is the victim fault degree and its effect on sentencing; For actors, induce its crime reason is various, the victim fault is just one of them.The fourth part is the judicial legislative demands. Principle of a legally prescribed punishment is the core of the criminal law, have to be convicted and punished the behavior of the person,must be based on facts and take law as the criterion. It must be legal, because the legal lag, in dealing with intentional injury cases could not be in accordance with the phenomenon, will appear when then will resort to legislation, to perfect it, in order to better guide the practice.