Study On The Judicial Determination Of Drunk Driving Dangerous Driving Crime

With the rapid development of social economy,different types of motor vehicles have become popular among the public,which makes it convenient for people to travel.Meanwhile,frequent traffic accidents occur.China is a big country with a "drinking culture".The phenomenon of drunk driving,even drunk driving,occurs from time to time,which poses a serious threat to the safety of the public.The public strongly calls for these behaviors of drunk driving motor vehicles on the road to be included in the regulation scope of the criminal law.In response to social expectations,the eighth amendment to the criminal law(eighth amendment to the criminal law)has issued legal provisions on regulating drunk driving.Article 133 of the criminal law clearly states that people who drive a motor vehicle on the road after being drunk will be convicted and punished for the crime of dangerous driving.Since the regulation of drunk driving motor vehicle penalty issued,drunk driving motor vehicle behavior has been significantly reduced.However,with the rapid development of society,all kinds of criminal behaviors appear in various forms.In judicial practice,there are also many problems in the judicial determination of specific drunk driving behaviors.This paper mainly selects three cases in the form of case analysis,summarizes the focus of controversy,and conducts legal analysis around the focus of controversy,so as to draw conclusions.It is hoped that while discussing the focus issues of drunk driving dangerous driving crime(hereinafter referred to as drunk driving dangerous driving crime),it can play a positive role in determining drunk driving dangerous driving crime in judicial practice.In the first chapter of this paper,three cases related to drunk driving are selected to summarize two focus issues through combing and comparison.First,there is a dispute on the identification of subjective guilt of the actor in the crime of drunk driving dangerous driving.Secondly,there is a dispute over the identification of drunk driving in the crime of drunk driving.In the second chapter of this paper,the legal analysis of the above two controversial focus,and through the analysis to put forward their own views.First of all,there is a conflict between the subjective aspects of drunk driving dangerous driving crime in the academic circle,and scholars have different understandings on it.In summary,there are mainly three forms of views.Based on comprehensive cases and legal theories,this paper tends to "deliberately".At the same time,it is found that the main reason for the court's inaccurate positioning of the subjective fault of the criminal is that the subjective fault of the drunk driving dangerous driving crime is not clearly distinguished from the subjective fault of the criminal who endangers public security by dangerous means.In this paper,the differences between the two subjective SINS are compared through the differences in cognition and will.Secondly,the identification of drunk driving is controversial.Before analyzing drunk driving behavior,two basic problems of "motor vehicle" and "road" must be clarified.There are objective standards for the identification of "drunkenness" in the practice department,but there are different voices on this standard in the theoretical circle.Mainly through sorting out cases,it is clear that when the drunk driving behavior is serious,it is not within the scope of the regulation of drunk driving dangerous driving crime,and whether the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means can be established.Of course,it is also necessary to clarify the factors that affect the drunken driving plot.In the third chapter of this paper,through the induction of focus issues,key issues of legal analysis,draw their own conclusions and enlightenment.The observation of the law on drunk driving dangerous driving crime only objectively prescribing drunk driving behavior,and some details of drunk driving behavior should be clarified to deal with the complicated case in judicial practice.The purpose of criminal law is to punish crime and to prevent social problems.However,the maximum sentence of drunk driving dangerous driving crime is just criminal detention.For example,for some serious drunk driving offenders who fail to play a good regulatory role,it is necessary to increase the sentencing term of drunk driving dangerous driving crime.In the process of writing the article,through the selection of typical cases,sort out the cases,summarize the controversial issues.In order to solve the problem to find the literature,combined with the relevant information to analyze the problem,hoping to provide some help for the judicial practice difficult to solve the dispute.