Research On Successive Joint Complicity

Successive joint complicity originated in Germany and Japan,which aims to study the responsibility of the person who halfway joins others in crime.In common law countries,the criminal responsibility of Successive joint complicity has caused heated political argument,as a result,the responsibility will be different in terms of the different doctrine of Successive joint complicity.In recent years,with the exchange of domestic and foreign criminal law theory,domestic scholars have generally accepted the theory of Successive joint complicity,while similarly,there is also a heated debate about Successive joint complicity,and justice departments are also different in dealing with related issues.So there is still a need for further investigation of Successive joint complicity.This paper is divided into four parts:The first part is about an overview of Successive joint complicity.This part first chooses two cases in the judicial practice,and through the introduction of the two cases and the final decision of the court,points out that the current justice departments have different views on the Successive joint complicity,and thus the criminal responsibility of the Successive joint complicity will be different,which certainly inherited the theory of Successive joint complicity to further explore.There are many views on the concept of Successive joint complicity,which all have some shortcomings.By analyzing and summarizing the views of other scholars,this paper gives my own viewpoints: Successive joint complicity is a form of Joint complicity that after the first person has embarked on the implementation of the crime,before the end of the crime,the other person joints based on the joint crime of intentional,single or together with the first person complete the crime.The second part is the identification of Successive joint complicity.This part first introduces the conditions of Successive joint complicity.First,it is necessary to meet the subjective and objective conditions of the common crime.Then,in terms of intervention time,the starting point should be after the first person committing the crime,the ending time should be before the end of the crime.On this basis,this article compares Successive joint complicity with one-sided accomplice and recruited criminals.The third part is the study of the criminal responsibility of Successive joint complicity.This part begins with the theory premise of accomplishing the criminal responsibility of the accomplice-the essence of Successive joint complicity,clarifies the different understanding of the total crime and the common understanding of the nature of Successive joint complicity,which leads to the existence of difficult disagreement with the criminal responsibility of the theory,The theoretical basis of writing,that part of the crime together.On the basis of this,it briefly introduces the different theories of moral responsibility of German and Japanese criminal law and domestic scholars on the recognition of criminal responsibility,through the analysis of the different theoretical points of view,This article provides my own position.That is,in determining the criminal responsibility of Successive joint complicity,we should avoid inheritance of the nature of the crime of accomplishment and responsibility for the commitment to confuse: on the one hand,the nature of the crime should be combined with the subjective intentional and objective behavior to determine their behavior On the other hand,in the responsibility of the commitment,the post-actor only after the intervention of the common behavior and the first person constitute a common crime,before the intervention of the first person's behavior and the results are not Take responsibility.The fourth part is the recognition of the criminal responsibility of Successive joint complicity under special circumstances.This part discusses the criminal responsibility of Successive joint complicity under three special occasions,such as unknown causality,transformation offense and misunderstanding.First,when the causal relationship is not clear,the determination of the criminal responsibility of the postcrime can draw on the idea of dealing with the defendant at the same time when the causal relationship is not clear,and the first person is responsible for the whole crime,In transformed crime,we should first clear thethe premise of "transformed crime is not status crime",and then according to the post-intervention time points of the different distinction between the criminal responsibility of each person;besides,in the case of misunderstanding should be according to the law to understand the wrong and the fact that the wrong understanding of the principle of different treatment,to identify the criminal responsibility of each person in different circumstances.