Study Of The Afterwards Act Of Impunity

The afterwards act of impunity,(also known as the afterwards act of co-punishment)is a concept introduced from abroad,there are disputes in its semantics and in dealing with related issues.It is better to be defined as"co-punishment" than to be understood as "impunity",that is,the latter act is included in the evaluation of the crime of the former act,and the common crime is convicted and punished.Specifically,it refers to an afterwards act in which the former act has a continuation of the illegal state,the implementation of it is to ensure and utilize the former act's illegal interests.It satisfies the conformity of the constitutive requirements,illegality and responsibility,because it is jointly evaluated in the crime of the former act,so it is not independently punished as a crime.In the attribution of the crime number state and the choice of the theoretical basis,the different positioning of the crime number state is essentially the different understanding and choice of the theoretical basis.Based on the theory of the standard of infringement of legal interests,the principle of comprehensive and prohibition of repeated evaluation,as well as the principle of suitability between crime,responsibility and punishment,the crime of the latter act can be evaluated by the crime of the former act.The most fundamental reason is that it does not infringe upon the new legal interests.The conviction and punishment as a crime can comprehensively and non-repetition evaluate its guilt.so as to implement the principle of adaptation of crime and punishment.At the same time,it negates the principle of the possibility of anticipation and the theory of solution of constitutive elements as reasonable theoretical basis.There are four main doctrines on the attribution of the crime number state,which are original impunity,overlap of articles of law.inclusive crime and continuous crime.There is the opinion of absorption of crime in China.China should learn from the classification of Japan and treat it as an inclusive crime.It isn't based on the evaluation of the static relationship between articles of law.but on the dynamic evaluation of value judgment.The determination of establishment of elements needs to be based on its semantics,the attribution of the crime number system and theoretical basis.The explicit establishment of elements can provide a clearer standard for application.It includes the following four aspects:Firstly,it must be on the premise of the continuation of the illegal state,the former criminal act has been carried out,and the latter has been carried out in the continuity of the illegal state.Secondly,it has the identity of the subject,and the same actor's execution or participation in the former and latter acts can be evaluated in the crime of the former act.and the acts of others unrelated to it can't be evaluated.Thirdly,it has the identity of legal interests.The former and latter acts infringe on the same legal interests and do not exceed the degree of infringement of the former legal interests.Acts that infringe on new legal interests or exceed the degree of infringement of the former legal interests cannot be included in the crime of the former acts.Fourthly,the independent criminality of latter act,the latter act has to meet the requirements of conformity of the constituent elements,illegality and responsibility.It excludes purely factual acts and acts of lack of accountability.In practice,the establishment of the elements is the direct basis for judgment,and is supplemented by theoretical basis to help understand and use.In dealing with the larceny and its latter acts,the act of possession and use does not belong to the afterwards act of impunity;the act of destroying property and the act of holding guns and ammunition after stealing them belong to the afterwards acts of impunity.The act of harboring,transporting and selling stolen goods committed by the offender is not lack of responsibility and does not belong to the afterwards act of impunity;the act of holding,using,selling and transporting counterfeit money after counterfeiting it can be evaluated by the crime of counterfeiting money,which is an afterwards act of impunity.In the treatment of accomplice,the evaluation of the former and the latter is limited to the same actor,and the evaluation does not deny the criminality.The establishment of the principal,instigator and assistant of the latter has nothing to do with whether the former is included in the evaluation.As for the disposal of limitation of prosecution,the occurrence of the latter crime interrupts the limitation of prosecution of the former crime,and the limitation of prosecution is recalculated from the date of the latter crime,and the former and the latter crimes are independently calculated;if the limitation of prosecution of the former crime has expired at the time of the latter crime,it will not affect the conviction and punishment of the latter crime as an independent crime.