Cognizance Of The Crime Of Negligence Of Duty

The purpose of this article is to solve part of the application of negligence duty through case analysis.The research methods are conceptual analysis,legal analysis,case analysis,and literature summary.It mainly studies three issues:the expected possibility of violating duties;the explanation of the "serious consequences" of the crime of negligence;the use of the theory of negligent joint principal offender in the crime of negligence.The first part includes the explanation of responsibility and the evaluation of anticipation possibility by the theory of expected possibility.The crime of negligence of duty is actually an act of non-performance or incomplete performance of duties,so the most important point is the definition of duties.Responsibility comes from the law and position,so only if the meaning of the responsibility is determined,can it be judged whether the responsibility is violated.When the law does not clearly specify the content of responsibilities,we must explain what the responsibilities represent.The purpose of the establishment of the anticipation possibility theory is to deter the criminal responsibility of the perpetrator through human nature and morality.It must judge the behavior by some fair standard.The theory should be based on the standard of typed people and supplemented by the standard of actors.Legislation cannot force people to do what is impossible.The second part is based on the study of Wang Guirong's case of negligence.Researched the determination of damage results and re-interpreted the four standards of damage results in judicial interpretation,which focused on the bad social impact and the significant loss of national interests and public and private property.All four standards should be comparable."Severe social impact" must be judged from three aspects:the scope of social impact,the number of people affected,and the emotional level of affected people.As long as it conforms to the image that affects the state organs,reduces its credibility,affects the impartiality of the justice,causes dissatisfaction among the people and triggers mass incidents,collective petitions,and special media reports and concerns,which can damage the national economic security,it can be deemed as "causing Bad influence ",and the case has already met this standard.As for the interpretation of the bottom clause,it should be interpreted from the perspective of crime theory,composition theory,and the general public.The criminal law is a code of conduct.Violation of this code will be punished by the criminal law;the essence of the crime is the act of infringing on the legal interest,and the purpose of the criminal law is to protect the legal interest.Therefore,the judge should combine the form and essence when judging whether it constitutes a crime,and comprehensively evaluate the crime.In the third part,the research is on the joint criminals of negligence,one is"collective research",and the other is the supervision of negligence.Current mainstream views and criminal law both believe that joint negligence is not an accomplice.Every criminal has his own criminal responsibility.But this view cannot be explained,and all members in the "collective research" cause damage together.Each member cannot be independent of the other members,and all members have a common duty of care to prevent wrongful and false cases.Evaluating each member individually not only fails to accurately evaluate the "collective" behavior,but also violates the principles of criminal law.The theory of negligent joint principal offender solves this problem well.Although this theory is not supported by the judiciary,the core point of the theory "all members bear full responsibility" has long been widely applied in judgments.This phenomenon shows the rationality of the theory of losing the joint principal offender.