On The Definition Of The Boundaries Of "Legitimate Defense"

Legitimate defense plays an important role in protecting the interests of the state and the legitimate rights and interests of citizens.It is an important power given to citizens by law.However,in judicial practice,due to the improper application of the constituent elements of self-defense,especially the necessary limits,some acts of self-defense are treated as excessive defense,which to a certain extent inhibits the effective and reasonable play of the role of self-defense.The purpose of the necessary limit of self-defense is to find out the problems caused by the use and use limit of self-defense in judicial practice,analyze the causes to solve the problems,and reduce the contradictions caused by the unclear definition of the limit of self-defense.As for the debate on the necessary limit of self-defense,the main viewpoints in the academic circle are divided into "necessary theory","basic adaptation theory" and"compromise theory".Most scholars support "compromise theory".The main misunderstandings in the definition of justifiable defense include the logical judgment of"only result theory",which means that "causing significant results" is equal to excessive defense,and justifiable defense is wrongly considered to constitute a crime,etc.In the boundary of self-defense,we should pay attention to the fault degree of both sides in the cause of contradiction,judge from the perspective of guard,deeply implement and analyze the principle of crime and punishment,and adhere to the new idea of "law can’t give way to illegal" order.This paper discusses Yu Haiming’s case of self-defense,combs the criminal provisions and academic disputes of self-defense,and leads to the differences between the theory and practice,the public and the judiciary in the field of self-defense.Further analysis of the main problems of the limit of self-defense,and put forward the corresponding countermeasures.This paper mainly discusses the boundary of self-defense in Hemingway’s case of self-defense.The first part reflects the judicial status quo of self-defense through the case of "Yu Haiming’s self-defense",which is carried out by typical cases.Through the brief introduction of the case and the focus of controversy in Yu Haiming’s case of self-defense,it leads to the main academic views on self-defense:the theory of necessity,the theory of compromise,the theory of basic adaptation and the theory of compromise.Although this paper is more in favor of the compromise theory,it does not cover all cases of self-defense in judicial practice.The second part analyzes the main reasons for the differences between the theory and practice of the definition of self-defense and the differences between the public and the judiciary,so as to obtain the standards of urgency and end time in self-defense,and the logical judgment of "only result theory" which often affects the behavior of self-defense to a large extent When the key.In the end,the author summarizes the principle of rule of law which has guiding significance in judicial practice in order to provide some new ideas for the judicial application of self-defense system.