Imagine Competing With Distinction Lapping Of Legal Provisions

In criminal law academics are among the most theoretical research problems, imagination and clauses of concurrence between two competing theories to distinguish between issues also listed. But even scholars have invested so much effort to study this problem, the distinction between the two, has still not come to a definite conclusion. Both are have their own set of theoretical system, Imagine competing emphasis on behavior while violating a statute plurality of circumstances, to choose among the most accurate assessment of the law shall be applicable to the offense, other violations of the law constitute a crime should be considered as a sentencing in this regard; The emphasis on Lapping of Legal Provisions of the act at the same time a violation of several articles, use Lapping of Legal Provisions types analyzed relationship between each post, Choose one to accurately characterized this aspect of human behavior crime. A huge number theory of the criterion for distinguishing between the two, but only criterion for distinguishing doctrine debate, and focuses on the "standard" word, To build from dazzling the public out of a theory which unified standard, it is not easy. Is committed to academic discussion of this standard, it seems to ignore another path, Upcoming criminal law judge issues existing between the charges of competing with the clauses of concurrence of imagination, suffering and Criminal Subjects controversial clauses of concurrence than competing imagination to distinguish questions of mutual mastery. This paper selects Supreme Court on the judicial interpretation of the crime of money laundering perspective, thinking started to explore two paths, One criterion for distinguishing accountability imagine competing with the clauses of concurrence of two theoretical issues, In order to clarify the crime of money laundering judicial interpretations mentioned, Ambiguous relationship between money-laundering offenses and to disguise or conceal the proceeds of crime, the crime of the proceeds of crime, and harboring, transfer, concealment of drugs, stolen goods crime three drug crime; Second, under the clear relationship between three crime premise of the criterion for distinguishing two theoretical problems are inconclusive.The article is structured as follows:The first part, the analysis of the Supreme People’s Court judicial interpretation of the crime of money laundering Article 3.It leads to the subject of the article, namely the crime of money laundering and to disguise or conceal the proceeds of crime, the crime of the proceeds of crime, and harboring, transfer, concealment of drugs, poison stolen sin, what exactly is the relationship among the three crime? Article sort of, from the legislative history of the three make a brief overview of the crime, to reveal the jumbled contact three crimes, and to start on three sins relations;The second part is to imagine a general overview of competing theories, Respectively, from the concept of an act, the nature of the crime number three competing theories to analyze the imagination, good theoretical groundwork for the discussion below;The third part, for the imagination is different clauses of concurrence theory competing theory is controversial, once the focus of the doctrine of finishing. This part is the main body of the article, the author briefly after the clauses of concurrence, to seize the difference between different from the distinction of the difference between the two been described in detail, and finally to distinguish between the two standard theory overview, comments;The fourth part, imagine competing Or Lapping of Legal Provisions. Undertake discussed earlier three parts, two of thinking to make a choice among the paper path, choose the second path, targeting three crime imagine competing relationship, then the relationship between crime in the next three clear premise, imagine competing reasonable definition together with the clauses of concurrence of the distinguishing criteria.