Study On The Qualitative Of The Coerced Homicide Behavior

In recent years,many cases of coerced murder have aroused the concern of the society.At the same time,how to clarify the murder of murder has also caused a discussion boom in the field of criminal law.There are not many academic articles on the investigation of coerced murder in China,mainly from monographs and periodicals.Through reviewing relevant materials,present research and opinions are mainly limited to the following four types:The first type,through a comparative study of forced behaviors at home and abroad,proposes to separately stipulate forced behavior in China's criminal law;the second,using the theory of expectation possibility,advocates that the act of murder is not expected,and thus is not Any punishment;third,through the study of emergency hedging,believes that the intimidation of murder has established an emergency hedging to prevent illegality.Fourthly,through the distinction between violent accomplice and emergency risk avoidance,it is believed that the coerced murder should establish a coercive accomplice,which can only hinder guilt,but the above four research viewpoints are relatively isolated,and the phenomenon of arguing is more prominent,lacking behind the theory.Thinking and clear system positioning.There are many essays on forced behavior in related journals and academic articles,but there are few questions about how to arbitrarily punish murder under the conflict of life law,and the research is not deep enough.Therefore,the existing research is still unable to answer the question of how to determine the murderous behavior of coerced murder,and further exploration is still needed.In China's current criminal law,there is no separate specific regulation on the meaning of coerced behavior,and there is no perfect system in the study of science.Therefore,it is difficult to obtain relatively consistent and stable guidance in judicial cases.For example,some cases of the same or similar cases of coerced murder have resulted in different judgments in judicial practice and are prone to application problems.Therefore,based on the above-mentioned problems,this paper discusses the main theoretical viewpoints and problems based on the actual situation of the judiciary in our country.It is concluded that the coerced murder behavior cannot establish emergency hedging in essence.In addition,based on the current legislative situation in China,Before the coerced act is not clearly defined in the criminal law,this paper believes that the case should be considered,the coerced murder is classified as a coerced offender,and according to the actual circumstances of the case,the sentence is reduced or exempted from punishment.In the structure of the article,the preface of this article introduces the source of the problem,the research background and existing problems,and proposes new solutions and ideas.The body part officially begins to discuss the nature of murder in life under coercion.The details are as follows:The first chapter: the classification of coerced behavior and the choice of criminal theory system.First of all,because of the degree of coercion,content,etc.,it will affect the character of the coerced behavior.Therefore,this chapter classifies the object that is invaded by the coerced cause and the coerced behavior.This paper mainly discusses the coerced person under severe stress.Conducting a life-threatening behavior against a third person.Secondly,due to the different countries and regions,the criminal constitution system in criminal law is mainly divided into two levels,three levels and four elements.Because our country is closer to the legal system of the civil law system,the main crimes in this chapter will be coerced murder.Compare it in four elements and three levels.Through analysis,it can be seen that the three-level criminal theory constitutes a hierarchical system,which is more conducive to the analysis of complex cases such as coercion and murder.Therefore,this paper chooses to use the three-level system as a discussion platform.Finally,it analyzes the position of expectation possibility in China's criminal law system,and puts forward the viewpoint of this article,that is,in the existing criminal law of our country,the act of coercion and murder does not constitute an emergency risk avoidance,but the coercive offender of joint intentional homicide should be established.The second chapter : The theory of questioning the murder of murder does not constitute an emergency hedging.First of all,this chapter explores the relationship between the murderous murder and the emergency risk avoidance.In the process of analysis,there are two main problems: First,can the risk-averse object of emergency hedging be life? Second,the necessary limits for the behavior of the hedging person in emergency hedging? To answer these questions,the key is to explore the basis for the establishment of emergency hedging.The establishment of emergency hedging mainly includes social solidarity obligations and social compulsory insurance,but through analysis,no matter which doctrine,the victim does not endure the obligation of others to deprive themselves of their lives,and murder does not have the advantage of measuring the rights.Therefore,except for special circumstances,life cannot be the object of emergency hedging.In order to analyze the nature of the coerced murder in a more comprehensive way,this chapter discusses the victim's worthy protection and the victim's defense right from the perspective of the victim and the relevant knowledge of the victim's doctrine,thus drawing the victim's tolerance for the risk aversion behavior.The scope does not include the situation in which others deprive themselves of their lives,and the victim has the right to defend him in the face of being killed by the coerced person.The third chapter: The coerced accomplice of the crime of coercion murder should be established.In order to distinguish between the accomplice and the emergency hedging more accurately,this chapter compares the threats and emergency hedging from the two perspectives of the constituent elements and the behavioral process,and then analyzes the conditions and basis of the accomplice.And using criminal law,legal philosophy,game theory,"Prisoner's dilemma" and other methods and the principle of a legally prescribed punishment for crimes to argue that it is considered that the coerced murder is a violent accomplice,can be mitigated or exempted from punishment.The main innovations of this paper are as follows: First,the focus of research is focused.Different from the related articles of the existing research on coerced behavior,this paper will be the focus of research on coercive homicide.Some major problems in the characterization of homicides under serious threats such as life are discussed one by one.Secondly,the coerced murder is placed under the criminal law system for analysis.Rather than studying the coercive behavior in the past,mainly through the comparison of criminal legislation at home and abroad.At the same time,this thesis uses criminal law,law philosophy,ethics,economics and other disciplines to conduct research and analysis.Thirdly,in the study of the coerced murder,this article combines the perspective of the victim,in addition to the analysis of the coerced actors.Through the knowledge of "Prisoner's Dilemma" in game theory to analyze the choice of the coerced in the face of threats;use the knowledge of victim creed and social solidarity obligations in German criminal law to analyze the tolerance of victims in the face of others' risk avoidance.In view of the needs of judicial practice and academic research,this paper attempts to explore and answer the problems encountered in the qualitative process of coerced murder in theory.The main shortcomings of this paper are: Due to limited time and energy and current academic level,there is still room for improvement.First,in the process of writing,I found that the problem of being convicted and murdered is not only the ambiguity of the nature of the act,but also the conflict between the legal benefits of life,the basis of the legality of emergency hedging,the limits of emergency hedging,and the victim's there are great differences in protection and so on.Therefore,in the process of argumentation,the author has redefined the relevant supporting theories as much as possible,but it is also impossible to achieve the profound theory.Second,the nature of being bullied and murdered can be as clear as this article,but whether it is completely correct may require more in-depth theoretical and repeated tests of practice.