On The Crime Of Refusing To Execute The Judgment Or Ruling

Article 313 of ‘the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China’ stipulates that the crime of refusing to execute a judgment or ruling shall be made.On August 29,2002,the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress promulgated the "Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China" The Interpretation of Article XIII provides further explanations and explanations of the crime.However,there are many problems in the form of theory,practice and perfection.This paper is based on this theory from the start,combined with practice,identify problems,analyze the problem,only to solve the problem for the criminal form of the theoretical framework,put forward some practical suggestions.This article discusses the three major parts,including the refusal to implement,the conviction of the three elements of the composition of elements of the theory,refused to implement the verdict,the verdict of empirical analysis,refused to implement the ruling,the conviction of the difficult problems and improve the proposal.The first part is the theoretical part of this paper.The study of the problem is inseparable from the analysis and judgment of the basic theory,refused to implement the ruling,the reason why the ruling was considered a criminal act,mainly based on the nature,illegality and responsibility of three,which is mainly based on Three Elements of Crime Theory.First of all,constitute the refusal to implement the verdict,the conviction of the crime is against the people ’s court has entered into force and has the content of the judgments and rulings,have the ability to perform without enforcement,and the circumstances are serious.Secondly,the people’s court is the sole authority to exercise judicial power on behalf of the state.According to the provisions of the Constitution of China,the people’s court independently exercises the jurisdiction of the judiciary.It is illegal to refuse to enforce the judgment that has already come into force,which is a violation of the constitution and provocation of legal authority.Finally,based on the original intent of this crime,from the overall analysis of the relevant legal rules,the actor of the people’s court of the effective judgment,the determination of the obligation is clear,and their ability to perform is also known,Deliberately evading or refusing to execute the judgment or ruling of the people ’s court in force,the subjective state of mind is that the people’ s court ’s judgment and ruling is not to be executed,this intention can only be a direct intention.Therefore,the perpetrators of their refusal to enforce the verdict,the decision is the responsibility of the act.In compliance with the refusal to implement the judgment,the crime of the elements of the crime,namely the ability to perform and refused to perform the court has entered into force the judgment,ruling,the circumstances are serious,ruled out the reasons for the offense,in line with the responsibility of this crime,That criminal responsibility and subjective state of mind,that constitutes the crime.Following the theory of third-class to convict,then the conclusion of guilt is the last to appear.Such a process of reasoning,that is,a process of continuously excluding the elements that do not have the elements of crime from the crime,is a way of thinking that conforms to the principle of the presumption of innocence,the elements of the third class are layers of progressive relations,Defense left a lot of space at the same time effectively protect the legitimate rights and interests of the suspect.The second part of this article is the empirical analysis of the crime of refusing to execute the judgment and ruling.The lack of empirical research is the source of water without roots,only from the theoretical point of view of this problem analysis of the lack of practical test,can not find the problem,analyze the problem.So empirical research is the main research method of this paper.By large data search refused to implement the ruling,ruling in 2008-2012,the national court sentenced 3086,2013-2016,the national court sentenced 3114,2008-2016 refused to enforce the judgment,the average annual crime Of the total amount of about 600 or so.In the execution cases,the defendants who refuse to execute the judgment and decide the crime often resort to all kinds of bad means to evade enforcement for a long time.However,once the risk of being held accountable is known,most of them will take active action to fulfill their obligations.To reduce the penalty responsibility,from the "money refused to perform" to "the money to actively perform" to "no money to borrow money to perform" change significantly.In this part of the empirical analysis,according to the different types of payment,can be divided into the property to pay the obligation to refuse to perform and perform the obligation to refuse to perform.Among them,the refusal to enforce the obligation to pay property is embodied in the confirmation of property rights disputes,private lending disputes,corporate lending disputes,financial lending disputes,financial loan disputes,contract disputes,including contract disputes,construction contract disputes,contract disputes,Disputes on the transfer of land use rights,disputes on partnership agreements,disputes on property damages,compensation for tort liability,motor vehicle traffic accident liability disputes,social insurance disputes,divorce disputes,custody disputes,legal succession disputes and social maintenance disputes.Among them,in the actual judicial practice,the most number of cases occurred for the civil loan disputes,the sale of contract disputes,marital succession disputes,tort liability disputes and motor vehicle traffic accidents.Property payment behavior in the judicial practice to define more clearly,are the executors of the application for the implementation of the obligation to pay the money is completed as the standard.The cases of refusing to perform the obligation of performance include: the confirmation of property rights disputes,the elimination of nuisance disputes,the right to land contract management disputes,possession of the return,the lease contract disputes,private lending disputes,custody disputes.Behavioral obligations to fulfill the definition of standards and property to pay the implementation of behavior is relatively complex,the reason,first of all,is the performance of some acts in the form of omission,such as the possession of uncontrolled state,The second is that in the case of refusal to perform the obligation of performance,the larger one is characterized by the violence of the executed person to resist the execution.The third part of this article is the analysis of the difficult problem of judgment and ruling,and the suggestion of the future criminal form.2,the imbalance of sentencing of this crime;3,the role of the court conflict;4,"false obligor" in the implementation of the "false obligor" in the implementation of the decision,the crime is not a crime,Definition difficult.These four major problems from the different aspects of mining in addition to the existing legislation and practice in the operation of the main problems.First of all,the establishment of an independent charge of refusing to implement civil judgments,adjudicating the crime;secondly,to improve the offense set;again,the crime of crime,,Reasonable determination of jurisdiction and jurisdiction of the trial;Finally,the establishment of substantive examination procedures.Through these channels to improve such crimes.By putting forward problems,analyzing problems and solving problems,the author starts from the theory and practice,discusses the theory of refusing to execute judgments and verdicts,the practice analysis and the improvement of the charges.The second is to uphold the dignity of the law and the judicial authority,and to create a good atmosphere for the people’s court to enforce the ruling.The second is to uphold the lawful rights and interests of the party winning the lawsuit.Judicial practice in the refusal to implement the judgment,the determination of the crime and the fight against acts must also be consistent with the purpose of legislation to this case as a study refused to enforce the ruling,the conviction of the benchmark,because it is representative of the farmers lead to the implementation of land Problems,but also the implementation of real estate issues into the scope of the study.The author holds that whether the law of a country plays the expected social effect can be measured according to two aspects: whether the purpose of legislation can be realized;whether the result of the people’s court is in accordance with the meaning of law and social development.