On The Expansion Interpretation In Criminal Law

The ambiguity of the law provides space for legal interpretation,but we can not argue that any legal norms will not be applied without explanation.Because such a view is harmful to the rule of law.The main content of the first part is that the concept of expanded interpretation should be to expand the implication of the terms of the criminal law in the meaning that the term of the criminal law may have,and to give the criminal law a more explanatory method than the usual meaning.Criminal classical school period,in order to solve the problem of arbitrary law,do not allow the interpretation of criminal law,and also do not allow expanding the interpretation.In order to better protect the social interests,Criminal empathy school period advocate a flexible attitude to interpret the provisions of criminal law,thus the expansion of the interpretation is allowed.Later,in order to strike a balance between safeguarding human rights and social interests,it was agreed that expanded interpretation should be used prudently.The main problem in the expanded interpretation of criminal law is to expand the relationship between interpretation and the principle of legality,to expand the relationship between interpretation and analogy,to clarify the rationality of interpretation and to conceal the limits of tolerance behind these issues.The second part states that the legal principle of the principle of legality does not exclude the use of expanded interpretations,but the prohibition of analogy.The expanded interpretation not only enables the content of the formal form of the principle of legality to be implemented,but also to maximize the release of the criminal code to meet practical needs.The clarity of criminal law does not exclude the expansion of the interpretation,and it also can promote the judiciary to achieve a greater degree of clarity with recognizing expanded interpretation.To a certain extent the expansion of interpretation can guarantee the correctness of the penalty and contribute to the realization of substantive justice.But the limits of the expanded interpretation are bound to be affected by the principle of tolerance and cannot be eliminated.Both Wittgenstein's ‘theory of language game' and Hart's open structure theory have expressed a view that the meaning of language cannot be delineated.Besides,with existing some problems in varying degrees,Kelsen's principles of completion as well as Dworkin's correct answer theory cannot draw a definite meaning of the border.So,we can only rely on pure doubts to judge whether the facts in the case of the border belong to the meaning of the edge of the law.That the expansion of interpretation and analogy cannot distinguish between the point of view contrary to the principle of legally prescribed punishment,should not be supported.We should not give up the scope of the literal meaning of the law in the criminal law,providing a broad scope for value judgments.The main content of the third part is: we should pay attention to the rationality of the test of the conclusion of expanded interpretation,and we cannot speculate the rationality of the conclusion of expanded interpretation by whether it's in favor of the defendant.For the abstract conditions of legal punishment,although it is a "dummy standard",but there are still typical cases and atypical circumstances.Therefore,the possibility of expanding the interpretation still exists,which is worthy of our attention.The test of the expansion of the interpretation of the conclusions can be started from two aspects,the form and the essence: the form of the side can be from the legislative intent,the scope of the literal meaning of the law,including the edge of the type of behavior and typical types of behavior caused by social harm,Whether the subjective malignancy is quite equal,to judge the rationality of the interpretation of the conclusion.The real side can be considered from whether or not it violates the stability and stability of the criminal law,the modesty of the criminal law and the necessity of punishment.Without the rationality of the expansion of the interpretation of the conclusion,although in the context of the scope of criminal law meaning,shall not be applied.The main content of the fourth part is: although there are less provisions of expanded interpretation in legislative interpretation than judicial interpretation,they are still worthy of our careful treatment.There are reasonable contents in the expansion of these legislative interpretations,such as the expansion of "letters" to include e-mails and so on.There are also unreasonable contents such as the expansion of "credit cards" as containing debit cards.Therefore,the legislator in the legislative interpretation to make the expansion of the provisions should be extended to explain the conclusions of the standard proposed by the strict test,not in the form of legislative interpretation of the legislative field,contrary to the spirit of criminal law.There are a lot of explanations in the interpretation of the judicial interpretation,and there is an appropriate expansion of the interpretation of the sale of fake drugs,inferior "sales" expansion as "paid to use for the purpose of buying and storing".Expand the number of criminal law provisions more,such as the production and sale of medical equipment in the crime of "sales" expanded as "purchase,use,purchase and paid use." Therefore,the interpreter in the development of judicial interpretation,the interpretation of the provisions must be repeated with different standards for repeated measurement,and constantly from the criminal law provisions,explain the provisions of social facts,strict judicial interpretation of the authority,not involved in the field of legislation.In the absence of legislative interpretation,the judicial interpretation of the provisions of the case of the referee may apply to the expansion of interpretation.In the case of a large controversial case in practice,there is a reasonable extension of the interpretation of the interpretation of "prostitution" as the purpose of profit for the purpose of sexual intercourse;also unreasonable expansion of the interpretation of a court in 2008,such as the organization will steal The "stealing" in the crime of transgressing the country(the border)is interpreted as "the act of transgressing documents." The referee can only be used in accordance with the standards set forth above in order to obtain a fairer referee result.In judicial practice,the judiciary should adhere to the "law is what" the iron law,not too much thinking about "what should be the law" which belongs to the field of legislation.