Research On Accomplice In Traffic Accident Crime

In 2000 the Supreme People's Court on the trial of criminal cases of traffic accident "the explanation of the concrete application of law(hereinafter referred to as" the judicial interpretation ")of paragraph 2 of article 5 "after letting others escape causing death" refers to the angel and the perpetrators to traffic offences an accomplice,the content of the rule caused quite a stir,academic circles because of the traffic accident crime belongs to the typical criminal negligence,"criminal law" provisions of joint crime need common intentionally,so criminal negligence does not exist a joint crime,so does that mean "judicial interpretations" regulation violated the criminal law provisions on joint crime? The author thinks that the judicial interpretation existence rationality,there is no theory of joint crime,the escape after traffic accident this is two independent behavior,this should be an independent evaluation,letting others escape causing death of the offender in the perpetrator not as an accomplice of crime,in view of the judicial artificial reasons,so to an accomplice of traffic accident.Therefore,the main content of this paper is how to clarify the theoretical basis for the accomplice of traffic accident crime in the case of "instigating others to escape and cause death".This paper is mainly divided into three chapters,the main contents are as follows:The first chapter makes a simple interpretation of the provisions of article 5,paragraph 2,of the judicial interpretation,and clarifies the conditions for the punishment of accomplices in the crime of traffic accident by the emissary and the perpetrator of "causing others to escape after causing an accident",and leads to the theoretical dispute in the academic circles on whether there is a joint crime in the crime of traffic accident.The second chapter mainly explains the theoretical basis for the establishment of a joint crime between the emissary and the perpetrator,and clarifies two problems.Second,the escape behavior itself has the value of separate evaluation.According to the argument,"letting others escape causing death" case,refers to the angel and the perpetrators deadly results in knowing the escape behavior would be to escape the situation is still can not make as an accomplice of crime,just because of the cause of legal fiction,to artificial for this kind of circumstance and the aggravated consequential offense accomplice of traffic accident crime,which refers to the messenger to an accomplice of traffic accident crime;The punishment of the offender for aggravating the offence as a result of the traffic offence does not change the nature of the offence itself,the negligence of the offence and the intent of the escape.The third chapter mainly clarifies how to deal with the errors of cognition of factual causality in crime of omission.The author thinks that "mistakenly assume that the victim death" situation of the offender for lack of nonfeasance crime intentionally,behavior person don't know oneself to exist as the victim relief obligations,shall not constitute its not as a crime,when that means do not agree with the understanding of the perpetrators error,the common behavior of person should qualitative problem,analyzing the specific situation in not as an accomplice category under discussed problems;"Mistakenly assume that the victim dies" the escape behavior and death case behavior person this causal relationship does not exist in fact as a result,the death of the victim is the result caused by previous accident behavior directly,no matter after the escape behavior is based on the perpetrator's own reason or because the instigated behavior refers to the messenger are not behavior of the person shall be included in the "letting others escape causing death" category,that is to say,this kind of situation refers to the angels who does not exist and the problems of joint crime.