Study On Legal Nature And Its Cognizance Of Road Traffic "Pengci" Behavior

The road traffic "Pengci" behavior may violate public and private property ownership, infringe on the personal rights of citizens and also endanger the public safety community. As a result, this kind of crime not only destroyed the social credit system construction, but also caused a huge impact to harmonious social public security order. In various types of "Pengci" cases, since the qualitative problems are solved not very well, the vast majority of "Pengci" behavior subjects succeed, which further increases the "Pengci" behaviors. The emergence of "Pengci" specialists is not only torturing conscience of offenders, but also reflects that the relevant departments’ behaviors are ineffective and inadequate. Which made us a clear understanding of the importance to take accurate and timely measures to combat such illegal and criminal behaviors.At present, "Pengci" cases showing the characteristics of crime by referring to the previous have changed a lot, such as past behavior basically belong to a separate crime, few people of collusion crime, now has been basically is a gang of collusion crime, crime more covert. And some people even put "Pengci" as family career, secondly, choice of tools and modus operandi of crime change, which presents new challenges for judicial organs to combat and driver prevention this kind of crime. After summarizing the main disposal method of the current road "Pengci" incident, this article studies the cognizance about involved dangerous to approach the harm public security crime, traffic accident crime, crime of fraud and extortion. According to the analysis results, we found that the composition of "Pengci" behavior does not conform to the above any kind of charges. Some scholars and practice workers insisted that under the crime of extortion, this kind of practice is questionable. In the road traffic "Pengci" cases, the behaviors of subjects have a cheat and the nature of the threat. There is little difference in making a threat and the time between "Pengci" and the crime of fraud or the crime of extortion, and a threat way also more was conducted on the spot, but there is big difference in the content of the threat. The crime of extortion is more focusing on infringe on personal life, health and reputation and so on, but "Pengci" subjects pretend to be injured in traffic accident which has already happened, citing with public power intervention in afterwards as the main content of threat, the content has "preconditions", and the content of the threat does not necessarily bring damage to the "Pengci" subjects. So the existence conditions and consequences of the threat are not exactly the same between "Pengci" and crime of extortion. In addition, crime of extortion belongs to property crime, while "Pengci" behavior not only infringes others property security, also seriously damage the public security and traffic order. Therefore, road traffic "Pengci" could not be characterized as crime of extortion.Through the above analysis, we found that the existing criminal law norms cannot provide "Pengci" cases on the roads with targeted, strong legal support and basis. To make up for the defects, China’s Criminal Law should add crime of Pengci. Actors subjective intentionally make traffic accidents, during the making process of traffic accident, they make use of some objective conditions or related person’s fault. For example, some people pretend to be normal walking and driving but are knocked down "accidentally", or drive a motor vehicle to scratches on the other side of illegal one deliberately, so that the other party mistake it for there own fault to lead to traffic accidents. Subjects of "Pengci" behavior has only one goal of traffic accident which is for others’property. But due to the increased "Pengci" case, our consciousness of self-protection is higher and higher, so, many people now are not willing to own "settled", but choose to call the police. Some "Pengci" behavior actors are aware of there error, they don’t want to call the police. Of course, in order to get the property of the other party, they may take other steps to further blackmail, such as by means of violence or disclosing privacy. In this situation, we must clearly understand "Pengci" behaviors qualitative in involving the imaginative joinder of offenses, implicated offense, causality identification and practiced limit problem. We can’t blindly believe that actors only offend crime of Pengci, but should separate behaviors where there is no overlap relationship between the front and rear. Take the combined punishment for several crimes as it is, and which has a over-limitation should be dealt with separately. Only by this way, can we truly carry out the principle of criminal culpability adaptation.