The Qualitative Analysis Of The Behavior Of Assaulting The Rival And Asking For Compensation

In the modern society of developed science and technology, the appearance of various kinds of modern information tools facilitates people's life. In the virtual environment, the communication between strangers becomes more and more frequent, and accordingly, all sorts of emotional disputes also increase gradually. In such circumstances, the cases of claiming properties, beating up mistress caused by the “derailment” increase constantly. Although, the fact of this kind of case is not complicated, there is the dispute about the cases' nature determination, such as crime's constituting and committing what kind of crime. Some people think that this kind of case is a pure civil dispute, and the doer's behavior of beating claiming properties belongs to civil infringement or unjust enrichment. While some other people think that it might involve into the unlawful detention, racketeering, robbery and other crimes. In addition, the dispose of this kind of case always involves into the balance between the legal principle and the emotion principle, and therefore, this kind of case still possess research value. This paper takes a real case happened in Chongqing as an example. Through concluding the focus of disputed problems involved into the case and carrying out the corresponding jurisprudence analysis, this paper demonstrates a few limits that shall be noticed when correctly determine the nature of this case, in order to provide the judicial determination of this kind of case with a train of thought for reference.This paper is divided into four parts, and in total, it has more than twenty thousand words.Part One: The basic situation of the case. This part mainly introduces this case's cause of action, details of the case, divergence and focus of dispute. In this case, all parties' opinions at investigation, prosecuting and judging stages had a relative big divergence, and it did not reach the agreement. The focus of dispute was centralized on the issues of “whether the defendant's behavior constitutes a robbery, offence of extortion by blackmail, and crime of false imprisonment or it does not constitute a crime? And If it constitutes a crime, is it a crime or crimes?”.Part Two: The jurisprudence analysis of the related issues. This part carries out further analytic demonstration to the theoretical problems related to this case's focus of dispute. Including the demarcation between committing a crime and civil infringement; the necessity analysis of the illegal possession purpose of the offence of robbery; the relationship among violence, intimidating and property obtaining in the offence of robbery; the relationship between the means behavior and the property obtaining of the offence of extortion by blackmail; the analysis to this case's purpose of illegal possession; the analysis to the means and special circumstances of the crime of false imprisonment, etc.. Through this part's theory analysis, it makes a theoretical preparation for the specific analysis of the following paper.Part Three: The analysis and conclusion of this case. Based on combining with the fact of the case, and according to this paper's jurisprudence analysis, it analyzes the involved focus of dispute. It concludes that in this case, the doer's behavior is the criminal behavior, and meanwhile, it dose not only exclude the possibility of this case's doer constituting the offence of robbery and the offence of extortion by blackmail from the reverse side, but it also demonstrates that the behavior of Wang A and Wang B conforms to the constitutive requirements of the crime of false imprisonment. Through analyzing the jurisprudence issues involved into this case, it reaches the analysis conclusion: Wang A and Wang B constitute the crime of illegal detention.Part Four: The research enlightenment of this case. This part is the theoretical and practical implications obtained on the basis of the author concluding the jurisprudence issues and practical issues involved into the case. Firstly, for the cases caused by the “derailment”, it shall consider its specific social factors and subjective factors, and correctly determine the nature of the cases; secondly, in order to effectively prevent the happening of this kind of behavior, the relevant functional departments shall adopt the effective measures, improve the public's cognition degree to the relevant laws, reaching the degree of having knowledge about the law and abiding by the law. After happening this kind of case, on the basis of effectively solving the dispute, the relevant institution shall fully consider the autonomy of will of the parties involved. It shall deeply understand the details of the cases when applying the law, and obtain a correct conclusion through comprehensively analyzing the factors of the cases.