Research On Crime Of False Litigation

Currently,China is undergoing the period of developing and transforming.There is a lot of false litigation in judicial practice,while the number of civil cases has increased year by year.On August 29th,2016,with Article 35 in the Amendment(IX)to the Criminal Law,Chinese legislative body added "Article 307-1 Crime of False Litigation" into the second section of "Chapter 6 the Crime of Impairing the Administration of Justice" in the Criminal Law.The object of the crime of false litigation should be the regular order of judicial authorities,the legal rights of the others being the random object of this crime.Moreover,the judicial order protected by preventing false litigation should be confined in the field of civil litigation,and the civil judicial order mentioned here needs to be understood in a broader sense.In light of the objective aspect of this crime,there are two types of behavioral modes which can fit in-collusion and unilateralism.Considering the modesty of the Crime Law,the "made-up facts" in the description of the crime should be explained as "bringing up civil litigation based on false civil relationships".So long as the behavior could give rise to civil judicial procedures,including the procedures of litigation,non-litigation as well as execution,it should be considered as "bringing up civil litigation" in this crime.The standard of identifying the accomplished offense of this crime,this dissertation holds that the crime of false litigation should be classified as an offense of act,which is to say,as long as the conductor brings up a civil litigation with fabricated facts,the behavior should be determined as accomplished offense.Owing to the legislative mode of Chinese criminal law,which is combining quality with quantity,the accomplishment of enforcement does not inevitably lead to the conviction of the crime.Therefore,the extent of harm to the legal interest in actual practice should also be taken into consideration.This dissertation also discusses the patterns for the quantity of this crime.In the situation of solitary offense,if the conductor brings up false litigation for defalcation,the crime of false litigation and the crime of false should be imaginative joinder of offenses;and the conducting of this crime and the crime of forging official documents and seals should be determined as implicated offenses.The principle of punishment of the situations above should be determining the crime that is with heavier punishment.In the case of joint crimes,if a judge takes advantage of his or her position to collude with a litigant in conducting false litigation,it should be determined as the imaginative joinder of offenses of the crime of false litigation and the crime of misuse of law in adjudication.Both of the offenders in this case should be convicted as committing the crime of misuse of law in adjudication,and the judge should be given a severer punishment while the litigant with no special identification should be punished as an accessory offender.The setting up of the crime of false litigation could be crucial to the judicial authorities on solving cases concerning false litigation.However,multilevel of administration as well as cooperation are still needed to contain the behavior of bringing up false litigation.