The Jurisprudence Analysis Of Li Yinjian's Intentional Homicide Case

Whether the husband and wife have the rescue obligations don't have the provisions of the law in our country.In practice,the rescue obligation is confirmed by the traditions as the four kinds of obligations in the form of sources.The theory will lead to the problem of expanding rescue obligations and different judgments in the same case.Therefore,it is necessary to abandon the form of traditional obligations source and discuss the source of the rescue obligations from the theory of substative obligations.In order to discuss this issue in depth,I chose a typical case called "intentional murder case of Li Yinjian" and analysis of the case by the combination of facts and theories.At present about the substantive exploration of the rescue obligation between husband and wife is still difficult,the source of the substantive obligations have no criminal law provisions.However,according to the theory of exclusive domination of the substative obligations,it is reasonable to determine,whether the spouse has a rescue obligation when wife and husband has the contradiction,one of them committed suicide.Assumption of risk can be classified into two categories: "self-endangering" and " endangering someone else ".And in the case of a spouse's suicide,the offender should not be penalized if the victim dominates the occurrence of harmful results.In cases of endangering someone else,the offender dominates the occurrence of harmful results,and thus in principle the offender cannot be exculpated.However,the offender can be exculpated on the basis of the self-liability theory and the Doctrine of Accomplice Dependency.Based on the theory of exclusive domination,I will put forward some judicial suggestions about whether the husband and wife have the rescue obligations.