Analysis And Perfection Of Dangerous Realization Theory

The causality theory in my country’s criminal law has the problem of strong philosophical color and too vague abstraction,and it is difficult to become a practical theoretical tool for judicial practice.It should learn from the theoretical results of dangerous reality and promote its own theoretical transformation and upgrading.The academic circles generally tend to regard the theory of dangerous realization as a revised version of the theory of causality,changing its form,but not changing its soul.This also leads to a series of problems in the application of this theory.Although the theory of danger realization originated from the theory of considerable causality,it does not mean that the attributes of the two must match,nor does it mean that they cannot be changed and developed a unique theory of causality.With the continuous changes in the social environment,the shortcomings of the equivalent causality theory have gradually been exposed,and have triggered the correction of the theory by relevant cases.The essence of the crisis is that the use of factual judgment standards cannot complete the jump to the norm.If it cannot break through this At one point,its "involution" characteristics cannot be changed.Therefore,in order to get rid of this fate,the theory of dangerous reality must reshape its soul,and its judgment principle must turn to the road from standard to standard.Following this,the form of judgment will also change,and the direct,indirect,and mixed dangerous reality created based on the factual causal process cannot be used,otherwise the form and soul will be inconsistent and it will be embarrassing to use it.If you want to reshape its shape,you must return to the "first principles" of the theory of danger reality,return to the danger itself,and reconstruct the relevant judgment model through the interrelationship between dangers.Therefore,it can be divided into three types of imputation judgment: "single style","concurrent style",and "induced type".In the realization of single-type danger,the pattern of the dangerous flow is A→B→C,that is,the implementation of behavior A creates forbidden danger B and leads to result C;the judgment model is A→B=C←D,that is,the case The danger of result realization is completely equivalent to the danger of performing behavior creation.In practice,most cases that do not contain intervention factors belong to this category;if the risk of realizing a case result is greater than or equal to the risk of performing behavior creation,that is,A→B≤C←D,Then it belongs to the reality of concurrent danger,and its dangerous flow pattern is A→B(C……)→D type,that is,the implementation of behavior A creates a forbidden danger B,and a series of and other such as C occur simultaneously or successively.B is irrelevant danger,and ultimately these dangers together lead to the occurrence of case result D.At this time,the key to judgment is whether the danger C realized by case result D can cover the prohibited danger B created by the act of execution.If it is,the danger can be affirmed to be actualized.;If not,deny the reality of the danger.If the dangerous flow pattern is A→B→C→……→D,that is,the implementation of behavior A creates forbidden danger B and induces a series of dangers such as C,and the series of dangers directly lead to the occurrence of case result D,then This is called the actualization of induced dangers.The judgment model is A→B≠C←D,that is,the danger realized by the case result is inconsistent with the danger created by the act.The key to judgment at this time is whether the danger C realized by the case result D is in the prohibited danger B created by the act A Range.The induced dangers can be further divided into natural facts and man-made facts.If the facts are within the scope of the prohibited danger created by the act,the danger can be confirmed to be actualized.