On The Object Of Justifiable Defense

The object of legitimate defense in criminal law should be divided into the object of direct action of legitimate defense--the object of the damage caused by unlawful infringement and legitimate defense--the unlawful infringement of the person's interests.When the two objects of defense are consistent,first,for the unlawful infringement of a person without liability,legitimate defense can be conducted.However,for humanitarian reasons,when the defender clearly knows that the unlawful offender is incapacitated,defensive strength should be limited,otherwise it is unjustifiable self-defense;second,the object of defense should not include animals,but when a person's unlawful infringement is reflected in the animal's behavior,the counter-attack against the animal is actually a counter-attack for a person's unlawful infringement,which can be still looked as legitimate defense;third,the perpetrators of joint offenders,the offenders who control the whole criminal activity and the instigators can become the objects of legitimate defense,and the accomplice can also become the object of legitimate defense.When the two defensive objects are inconsistent,first,the offender uses the third person's objects or body to infringe,the behavior that defender damages the thing or hurt the third person should be identified as legitimate defense;second,for the situation that the defender uses the third people's objects to defend should be dealt with for the specific type;third,the situation that the defender use the third person's body to defend should be identified as intentional injury behavior.Unlike "there is no unlawful infringement" in hypothetical defense,many defense object error are based on the existence of unlawful infringement as the premise,but because of due to object error or method error of defenders,the interests of a third party is damaged.This situation should not be identified as hypothetical defense,but should be handled in accordance with the wrong nature of the behavior.Generally,the nature of the wrong behavior is a factual error,deliberately constituting a negligent crime.However,when the defender is not sure about the attack of defense and he is aware of the possibility of injuring the legitimate rights and interests of a third party,he takes a laissez-faire attitude,which should constitute an indirect intentional crime.Out of the subjective psychology of emergency hedge,the defense behavior plays a legitimate defense role,which should be identified as legitimate defense.