Research On Judicial Application Of Crimes Of Endangering Public Safety By Dangerous Methods

The judicial application of the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means has covered all fields of people's daily life,work and production,and the theoretical discussion on this crime has never stopped.However,there has been no precedent for systematic empirical analysis of this crime,and few people have analyzed and demonstrated whether some special behaviors,such as driving "drift",forcing to stop or running on buses,constitute the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means.In the judicial practice,this crime has gradually become a "pocket crime" and has a tendency of expanding its application.There are some problems to be solved in the judicial application.In addition to the introduction and conclusion,this paper is divided into four parts to discuss:The first part is an empirical analysis of the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous methods.First of all,it analyzes and selects all judgments about this crime on the Internet of Chinese judgment documents in 2018 as the basis of empirical analysis sample sources.Secondly,through the analysis of all judgments,the applicable characteristics of this crime in practice are obtained: the definition of "public domain" in "public safety" is diversified,but the road is the main one;The behavior is more typical;Sentencing mainly focuses on three to ten years in prison.Finally,the specific reasons for the application of this crime are analyzed.The second part is the induction and summary of the controversial points in the theory of endangering public safety by dangerous methods.First of all,the definition of "other" should be placed in the category of the crime of endangering public safety in Chapter II,and it is not allowed to make a blanket clause at will.Moreover,according to the principle of similar interpretation,the acts of setting fire,exploding and throwing dangerous substances should be excluded.Secondly,regarding the concept and scope of "public safety",on the one hand,the "majority" should be regarded as the core to judge,including not only the actual majority,but also the potential or possible majority;On the other hand,the safety of pure broken property must be excluded from the scope of public safety.Finally,the definition of "dangerous method" should be limited from both nature and degree.Specifically,it is required that the behavior must objectively have the inherent danger of causing serious injury or death to most people,and this danger is direct,rapidly spreading and highly probable.The third part is to demonstrate and analyze some difficult problems of the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous methods in judicial practice.First of all,driving drift behavior,the spatial scope of the behavior of the actor driving drift belongs to the category of public safety,but this behavior does not belong to "other dangerous methods" in the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous methods.As for the subjective aspect of the actor,it needs specific case analysis.Secondly,forced stop or run on buses.With the introduction of the Criminal Law Amendment(11),the behavior of impairing safe driving is no longer criminalized as the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means.Forced stop or run on buses also needs us to be cautious.At last,the theft of manhole cover,the spatial scope of which the actor steals manhole cover belongs to the category of public safety,but it does not belong to "other dangerous methods" in the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous methods.The fourth part is the reflection on the judicial application of the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous methods.First of all,there is a trend of expanding the application of this crime in practice,which is manifested in inappropriately expanding the scope of public safety,including negligent crime in the category of intentional crime,and deviating the definition of other dangerous methods.Secondly,there are differences between the theory and practice of this crime,which is embodied in the fact that the judgment of public safety in this crime mainly focuses on the relationship between the unspecified and the majority,while in practice there is a situation that the recognition of public safety is equivalent to the judgment of public places;In theory,we will discuss whether the safety of individual major public and private property should be included in the scope of public safety,but in practice,we will hardly discuss this issue;In theory,it is cautious to identify and explain other dangerous methods in this crime,but in practice,it is often interpreted in an expanded way.Then,the promulgation of the Criminal Law Amendment(11)will no longer criminalize the behavior of obstructing safe driving and throwing objects at high altitude,which leads to the legislative thinking of this crime.Finally,the solution to the existing problems of this crime is explored,including: judging public safety with "majority" as the core;Exclude the safety of pure major public and private property from the scope of public safety;Carefully define the "dangerous method" in this crime;Strictly distinguish the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous methods from the crime of endangering public safety by negligence by dangerous methods.