On The Justification Of Justifiable Defense In The Act Of Emergency Avoidance

The question of whether justifiable defense can be justified in the academic circles has always been controversial.But there is not much research in this field.Most scholars have chosen to deny the justification of justifiable defense for emergency acts of avoidance,and the reasons for the denial are not unique.Some scholars start from discussing the justification of the emergency avoidance.Among them,utilitarian scholars pursue the maximization of social interests.They believe that supporting the justifiable defense of the act of emergency may cause losses to the general interest of society.Social scholars believe that the third innocent person liable for any emergency in the relationship with the person who took the emergency duty to tolerate violations in order to maintain mutual social relations;and some scholars at present three class crime constitute the system based on the value of the relationship between illegal illegal property class for self-defense they think the behavior of the three class closely.If the justification of justifiable defense for an emergency act is justified,it may lead to a contradiction in the theory of criminal law.However,there is a small part of the scholars is legitimate self-defense to support emergency behavior,some scholars believe that the act of rescue has no illegal property in criminal law,but with the civil illegal property,can become the object of justifiable defense.This article argues that the justification of justifiable defence for an emergency act must be affirmed.Because justifiable defense against emergency risks does not necessarily not meet the requirements of utilitarianism,nor does it necessarily lead to the contradiction of criminal law theory.And denying the justification of justifiable defense for the act of emergency avoidance is not in conformity with the basic criminal law principle of the protection of legal interests.