The Narrow Sense Of Complicity In Factual Errors

Although our criminal legislation does not make a clear distinction between accomplices,it adopts a unitary legislative model,but whether it is the judicial practice to discriminate between sentencing or the mainstream academic views on joint crimes.It is considered that the model of accomplice in the system of discrimination is more conducive to the characterization and punishment of the perpetrators.When the joint criminals in the narrow sense of the crime committed joint crimes,because the nature of the accomplice and the basis for punishment have not yet formed a consensus,judicial practice and theoretical circles will have differences of understanding,resulting in different recognition of the same phenomenon and behavior.The reason why the narrow sense of complicity in fact is wrong is that there are many differences.On the one hand,because the nature of the accomplice itself has disputes such as accomplice affiliation,accomplice independence,and accomplice duality,the basis for the punishment of the accomplice also includes the complicity of responsibility,the accomplice of the law,and The three categories;On the other hand,because the classification criteria for factual errors are not the same,there are constituent elements classification,error object classification,error content classification and so on.The different views of the two aspects interlace to form many views of the narrow sense accomplice's factual understanding.When the behavior of the narrow sense accomplice has serious social harmfulness and has a typology analysis,it should be considered that it should be included in the scope of the rules of the criminal.In order to clarify and better analyze the error of the fact of specific identity,the concept of identity crime should be clarified or even legalized,and an attempt should be made to clarify the problem of accomplice of identity crime in the general provisions of the criminal law.