The Legislative Provisions Of "Significant Losses" In Criminal Law And The Improvement Of Related Explanations

Studying the understanding and application of specific crimes will eventually settle on the discussion of a certain theory.If there is no deep understanding and grasp of a certain concept,the judicial practitioner may generate confusion on the understanding about the crimes.The concept of “significant losses” falls into this category.A review of the Criminal Code reveals that the “significant losses” clause is widely regulated in the criminal law,and there are many studies that explore the understanding and application of “significant losses” in a specific crime.However,in these studies,the identification of “significant losses” has not been placed in the entire criminal law system,which leads to different crimes having different considerations for “significant” and “losses”.Since each crime has its own uniqueness,we allow different understandings of “significant losses” in sin,but this does not mean that there can be different understandings of “unacceptable” for the same concept,or even completely deviate from the original meaning of the concept.In order to better apply the “significant losses” in judicial practice,we cannot stop at the understanding of“significant losses” in the sin of the micro level,and the discussion of the systemic“significant losses” at the macro level is also essential.The legislative provisions of "significant losses" in criminal law and the improvement of related explanations is divided into four parts.The first part discusses the Current legislative situation of “significant losses” incriminal law.In this part,we first discuss the existence of the “significant losses”terms in criminal law because we adopt a qualitative and quantitative legislative model,and "Significant losses" are quantitative factors in criminal law.Despite the negative attitudes of many scholars on this regulation,this paper discusses the rational basis for the existence of “significant losses” from the aspects of clearing the boundaries between departmental laws and conforming to the principle of legality of crimes.Then it introduces the legislation on “significant losses” in criminal law.In China's criminal legislation,“significant losses” clause has two basic provisions: the essential elements and the aggravating elements,and concludes that the "significant losses" clause has three characteristics: abstract generalizations,expression differences,and divided into the losses of the damaged object and the losses of the unspecified damaged object.Based on the characteristics of the legislative provisions,a simple evaluation of the “significant losses” clause was conducted.In the second part,we turn our attention to the Judicial interpretation and the Filing standard,then we analyze the characteristics and existing problems of the“significant losses”.Firstly,we analyze the characteristics of the current interpretation in terms of form and content.In form,both the Filing standard and the Judicial interpretation stipulate the “significant losses”,in which the number of Filing standard is more than Judicial interpretation,and the stipulations for the Filing standard are more concentrated while the provisions for Judicial interpretation are more dispersed.In contents,there are characteristics of “significant losses” involving the diversity of types,the diversity of conceptual terms used in loss of monetary measurement,and the extensive use of Miscellaneous Provisions.Then we claim the problems of“significant losses” clause.There is an incomplete interpretation of specific crimes,a lack of recognition of loss standards,an explanation of “illegal gains” or “illegal profit” as losses,and breakthroughs in the original criminal law.Finally,there are two controversial questions in the interpretation—whether the form of sin and the damaged object are the factors to consider of interpretation.We claim that the interpretation of the loss should consider the form of sin but should not consider thedifference of the damaged object.The third part is the conceptual analysis of "significant losses".First of all,it clarifies the connotation and extension of “significant” and “losses”.It is argued that the “losses” in criminal law must be the loss or reduction of certain right,and the "significant" is a degree word used to modify the loss,indicating that it is large and important.Furthermore,it is clear that the “significant losses” in this paper must have a conviction function,and the losses of the role played in sentencing is not discussed.“Significant losses” must be the loss of the conviction,including quantifiable losses and non-quantifiable losses,and have statutory punishment and objectivity.Secondly,we define the nature of the “significant loss”,and conclude that the “significant losses”is not subordinate to the amount crime and the circumstance crime,but it is a species relationship with the dangerous result.Finally,we discuss the scope of the “significant losses”.It is considered that the “significant losses” includes all direct economic losses as well as some indirect economic losses,including material losses and some non-material losses.The fourth part elaborates the consummate suggestions for the “significant losses”interpretation.First of all,we should add the missing content of judicial interpretation as soon as possible,so that the interpretation of “significant losses” is more comprehensive.Secondly,the interpretation should obey the original meaning of“losses”,not only to strictly grasp the degree of loss requirements,but also to prohibit the interpretation of “illegal gains” or "illegal profit” as loss,for loss of monetary measurement,the term “economic losses” is used uniformly.Finally,we claim that in the future,the state organs should be more explicit in the interpretation of “significant losses”,use less general terms,and should standardize the loss standards,raise the standard of damage to natural persons to the unit damage standard.What is more,clearly clarify legislation,not over-authorization,is used to consummate losses actions.