Determination And Punishment Of Attempted Crime Of Amount

The issue of deciding and punishing attempted crimes is a traditional controversy in the criminal law community in China.The swaying position of judicial interpretation and endless theoretical controversy have led to a chaotic situation in which the issue of attempted crime is inconsistent in judicial practice.Scholars have long sought to resolve the issue of attempted crime decisions and punishment in many ways,and much effort has been put into it.Guidance case No.62 "Wang Xinming Contract Fraud Case" issued by the Supreme People's Court Justice Committee on June 30,2016,when "achieved part" and "achieved part" coexist in a crime Made a decision and punishment.Specific guidance on contract fraud.In addition,in the Supreme People's Court Criminal Court-sponsored business guidance and research publication,Criminal Trial Reference: Punishment of Crime that Prevents the Prevention and Management of Epidemics by Law,No.1321 "Sun Jiaying and Jiang Zhi Fraud Case" attempt.Specific opinions are given on the decision and the criteria for penalties for exacerbated crimes.The publication of the above two cases has again triggered a surge in criminal law theory research on the issue of attempted crime in quantity.For this reason,it is necessary to conduct a thorough investigation and discussion of the decision and punishment of attempted crimes in order to clarify the specific decision and punishment method of attempted crimes.The main content of the first chapter is an overview of the amount of attempted crime.It begins with a judicial interpretation of the specific cases of the amount of attempted offenses and the amount committed in a criminal justice decision,followed by specific issues in the decision and punishment of a criminal justice.The amount of attempted crime.There are specific aspects to the confusion of attempted crime decisions and punishments: First,the scope of the attempted crime decision.Although attempted monetary offenses have been partially identified in the judicial interpretation,there are still doubts about the particular scope of the decision,especially in the determination of basic monetary offenses.Also,if it is determined that it has been tried,you need to determine exactly how it was attempted.Second,with regard to penalties for mass attempted crimes,the focus is on penalties for exacerbated crimes.Finally,there are special issues with how to determine and punish the amount of attempted crime,and how to determine and measure the punishment when the amount of completed and attempted crime coexists.The second chapter describes the root causes of the problem of attempted crime determination and punishment.Ambiguity in judicial interpretation and quantity Let's start with the "quantity" that is at the core of the crime problem.First,the controversy between attention to the provisions of judicial interpretation and legal fiction has led to some attempted crimes in judicial interpretation,raising doubts about attempts elsewhere.Second,the judicial interpretation of the attempted amount of crime includes expressions such as "other situations are serious." The "serious situation" rule further blurs the boundaries of the range of decisions on the amount of crimes attempted.The addition of "serious situations" and other comprehensive provisions also provides specific conditions for expanding the determination of the attempted amount of crime...Third,returning to the issue of monetary crime,the uncertain situation of monetary amounts is the root cause of the determination and punishment of attempted monetary offenses.In theory,the definition and classification of crime quantities is complex and controversial.This has caused a lot of controversy over the amount.More important is the attribution and function of the amount.How to understand the amount in the context of criminal law in my country,and how to understand the amount of crime,has direct importance in determining the amount of crime attempted.Also,the amount of crime can increase because the limiting features that the amount should have are not properly understood.The third chapter discusses the dilemma of deciding and punishing attempted crimes.In order to accurately determine the amount of attempted crime and to understand the judgment,the root cause,the amount controversy deviates from various definitions and classifications,and the nature of the amount needs to be investigated.Specifically,the understanding of quantity should be understood from a normative point of view,and the theory of normative quantity should be adopted.When it comes to determining the amount of trial,that amount must play an objective and subjective role.The fact amount is not the full amount,and the amount for the amount promises to include the actual damage and the risk of the amount.The particular situation of danger determines the amount of crime committed.It is necessary to distinguish the role of the amount in the treatment of the criminal amount and the criminal form of the criminal amount.Specifically,the crime amount is divided into the basic amount and the worsening amount.Understanding the base amount is directly related to determining the base amount of attempted offense and resolving the scope of the crime amount determination.Understanding the worsened amount is related to the decision and punishment for attempting to violate the worsened amount.After the scope of the attempted crime is basically determined,it is necessary to make a concrete decision about the attempted crime.The point of this part is that the final establishment of a quantity crime cannot focus solely on quantity,and if we consider that quantity as the establishment of a quantity crime,we fall into the situation of "quantity-only theory".Attempted crime decisions,especially in the selection of weighted crime decisions,should be used as a benchmark to reflect the principles of adaptation to crime,liability,and punishment.When coexistence is complete and attempted,the relevant provisions of judicial interpretation should only apply to multiple acts and it is not appropriate to separate a single act.