Study On Judiciary Determination In Self-Defence Limit

The judicial act on self-defence not just determines whether the act shall be guilt or not,but also it leads to the promising topic of preventing principle in legal society.Nowadays,a series of controversial cases have earned a great amount of attentions,meanwhile,it caused much more professional criticism.Indeed,that differences between lawmaker's goal-oriented institution design and judicial practices has drawn a huge friction,such as conclusion errors,lawyers' consistent question and failure to formal justice unsolved.This article will be going through the typical case,by that,breakthrough the dilemmas of judicial investigation on self-defence limits.After the research,we found that the factors about outcomes,emergency and conditions are so straightly effecting.Meanwhile,the wrong priority of judicial investigation on self-defence limits arose lots of problems.And the weapon-equity standard,damage-equilibrium standard,behavioral control standard and dominant prohibition standard are parts of reason why it is hard to achieve the correct answer.In fact,theory of independent-double negation conditions could be the right choice to solve the problems.Only if the behavior excess and the outcomes excess both meet,the behavior will be describe as legal.Specifically,we need investigate the factors of emergency first,the factors of condition behind that,and the factors of outcomes will be put at the end.Besides,some points are too important to miss.First,live on subjective perspective to investigate the factors of emergency,and refer to the standard of ordinary persons;second,take the self-defence of weapon into the consideration of behavior;third,investigate the number of defence object independently;forth,to avoid the outcome-centered theory,we shall lay attention to the legal interest of suspension.