Research On Criminal Omission Participation

In the theory of criminal law,Criminal Omission Participation is that the perpetrators of the obligation as a guarantor of a conspiracy as a crime could have been prevented without obstruction,leading to the occurrence of the outcome of the harm.There are two basic questions that need to be answered on the basis of non-participation.One is to engage others as a crime in the way of not committing a crime as a participant and as a perpetrator.Second,if the establishment of a joint crime,not as a participant is the establishment of a common prisoner or a narrow sense of accomplice?The answer to these two questions is of great significance to China's criminal law theory and judicial practice.From the current research in our country,the view that it is a mainstream view is that the view that no one is a common crime between the participant and the accomplice is supported by the majority of scholars,but the view that the two is a crime at the same time is not A few,and even get more and more scholars to support.And among the scholars who advocate not as a participant and a criminal who is a perpetrator,it is also a point of view of how to qualify as a participant.Among them,the purpose of behaviorist theory of the principal and the subjective theory has been very few people support.At present,the more influential three main points are:the principle of accomplice,said the important role of the theory,the reasons for the dominant theory.Among them,the principle of accomplice to get more scholars to support,but the important role of the theory and the reasons for the dominant theory is also a strong point of view.I found that the above views are mainly based on two ways of thinking.First,the solution to the theory of obligation.Second,the law of infringement as the center of the domination of the path.The solution path of the theory of compulsory duty does not fit with the provisions of our criminal law,and it should be criticized and discarded.It is an alternative solution to consider that participation as a participant in the framework of a dominant offense.However,there are still many shortcomings in the various views that exist under the existing domination path.The distinction between the German and Japanese literatures on the basis of the type of the guarantor's obligation to judge the distinction of the offender is necessary,but it must be amended to avoid the common problem of the theory of the obligation and to be subject to the domination of the crime.In the qualitative character of the participation of the act,the theory of the distinction of the act should be adhered to,that is,when the guarantor has a protective domination of the victim's helpless state,the guarantor does not act as a fictitious person;when the guarantor has custody of the person as a person,Not as an accomplice.The theory can be tested by various criticisms,in my opinion,is the most convincing distinction between not as a perpetrator and an accomplice.Finally,this paper analyzes the case of judicial practice in China by using the difference theory.