Analysis negligence of the theory of joint criminal.doc

analysis negligence of the theory of joint criminal abstract undeniable that technology is changing human life, but also planted a large number of system risk source, coupled with peoples legal awareness, sense of responsibility, weak, arising from the negligence of the crime rate is rising, causing serious harm to society. therefore, in the theoretical study of criminal justice in particular, should strengthen the criminal negligence of the punishment and prevention of this paper, a comparative study of the theories at home and abroad, combined with chinas actual conditions that the crime should be included in the joint criminal negligence theory study . the paper keywords negligence common criminal legal awareness a theoretical disputes, negligence, common crime theoretical study of fault common crime, school management sector held negate the two attitudes, and scholars on the sure foundation raised the limit say for sure that, still is certainly say extending restrictions certainly say, therefore i will be their discharge as for sure say be discussed scholars hold a positive attitude behavior is common, crime common in the common obligation of common violation that theory, the negative attitude of scholars crime is common that other theories, common meaning of the theory of the main say. the following comparative analysis of the conduct of the various theories at home and abroad. (a foreign the common criminal negligence established doctrine behavior is common to say whether the traditional view or not really is not as guilty of said negligence certainly common offense, the former jointly guilty based on behavior common is a necessary condition for as long as it has the meaning of joint criminal behavior can be established. the completely identified common criminal negligence established. latter, that is not true as guilty of that, say, the common crime of negligence bears the other co-actors to comply with the duty of care as an obligation, the obligation is not real as guilty of negligence common crime “common as an obligation, can each of you jointly evade the results as an obligation to joint actions for the joint implementation of all actions taken.” first act by a common, co-exclusive disposal, common crime inherent in common as an obligation, pursuant to which bi, certainly the results causality and foresee the possibility, as the guilty can be sure fault common crime. crime is common in common obligation to violate said admission of wrongdoing by common crime. representatives fujiki hero, otani real, they think in particular the risk of state, legal provisions on the co-actors the occasion of the common duty of care, the co-actors bear a relationship based on mutual use of supplementary everyone not only to note that they do not violate the obligations, and also to urge the supervision of joint actions in violation of the duty of care, such as the presence of persons acting in common in breach of its duty of care, it can be said that there are constituent elements of common crime, and thus recognition of a common criminal negligence. otsuka ren initially opposed fault crime to recognize the establishment of common criminal negligence. crime is common that other theories that common crime joint exercise of the crime must be specific crime, so only the establishment of a common crime knowingly and intentionally between representative takigawa fortunately, chen common criminal objective and subjective unity, objectively, not the same number of people to implement crime, the interests of constituent elements of the particular crime, but in the subjective, must is to achieve a specific result conscious go to common implementation of behavior, that is intentional for the premise, which is common behavior inherent the characteristics, so can not constitute negligence and common crime. seiichiro ono also believes that the lack of the most basic meaning of contact that the meaning of the results, can not say that the establishment of joint exercise, if the result is caused by two contributory negligence, the two bear their own responsibility for negligence, negligence competing to saito gold as a representative of the common meaning of said main body from the common purpose on the basis of mutual understanding angle negative common criminal negligence. believe that each of the common criminal behavior based not pay attention to the act results occurred, even if negligence is common, each identified as individually guilty of negligence committed, does not refer to the co-guilty provisions necessary. (two common crime of negligence established doctrine some scholars of china said behavior as the theoretical basis, considered common crime manifested in behavior, only two or more common crime elements, without the intentional case of common purpose, the establishment of an intentional common crime, the case common criminal negligence, was established at fault is held vertically scholars say for sure that the reasons are mainly the following aspects: first of all, speaking from a realistic point of view, most of the cases, such as in common dangerous operations engaged in production operations responsibility accidents in the accident, the duties of business, are caused by a number of contributory negligence, if not recognize common fault committed, does not meet the reality, and secondly, if not as a common criminal process, make certain cases not proper disposal, from the point of view of criminal responsibility, the punishment by sin, will increase the difficulty of the burden of proof, but also a waste of litigation resources, again, in modern society, more and more variety of highly specialized, dangerous work, resulting in more and more responsibility for the accident by negligence committed to deal with cases, be held criminally responsible, but also allows the entire staff to strengthen their duty of care and supervision of the work of the staff to collaborate with, and appropriate to avoid part of the criminal cases the occurrence. held to say that scholars also believe that the fault of the establishment of the common criminal, to comply with the main elements of common crime, but also to meet certain objective and subjective elements. example: there must be an unlawful result occurred with the common duty of care occasions, the perpetrator caused the occurrence of illegal results, the perpetrator has to not pay attention to the criminal negligence of the psychological attitude. the majority view of the chinese scholars to mean that the theoretical basis based on the following aspects: first, the performance of commonality of common crime in the common intention common to two or more persons requires intent is only to emphasize the common crime the same meaning, without requiring the implementation of common behavior, so contributory negligence crime does not have the essential characteristics of common crime, not by each other mean of the two contact only to the behavior of individuals formed a different single individual criminal behavior as a whole, and secondly, negligence different division of labor and the role of common crime among the different actors in the crime, you do not need to deal with common criminality requirement, again, negligence, common crime does not comply with the principle of unity of the subjective and objective elements of chinas criminal law. reposted elsewhere in the research papers download , common criminal negligence doctrine comment (negate that theory is not sufficient first of all, in the case of no prior intention liaison are subjective fault, the behavior of the actors are completely may cause results jointly against the interests of the victim, for example, zhao smoking guard the cotton plant, but after sucking smoke when their feet repeatedly stepped on a few cigarette butts, dry air, combined with a slight wind, mars gradually cause a fire to cotton, people to the fire found that plant extinguishing device long-term have lost the fire extinguishing function is disabled, so the increase of fire caused huge losses. significantly in the case of zhao and personnel responsible for the maintenance of fire extinguishing equipment without prior intention liaison, but the mutual negligence led to the final major losses occur. second, the negligence of common crime, the role played by the various actors is unscientific, for example, in a traffic accident, the owner of drivers in violation of traffic laws a traffic accident, the owner and driver behavior division of labor and from the the role is not the same, but are identified as a common traffic crime is wrong. again, as in the case of the common risk jobs, dangerous results can not prove who is responsible, you can not prove a causal relationship between the behavior and the consequences of the crime, such as the conviction and sentencing of punishment by sin is unrealistic, based on reality, occurrence of an increasing number of criminal negligence, but also should recognize the common criminal negligence, to solve the continuous development of the actual real life, so as to continuously promote the development of the law, the better the construction of the rule of law and harmonious society. (b admit fault common crime in line with chinas national conditions first, the majority of our scholars against negligence on the establishment of common crime because they do not comply with the principle of unity of the legislative objective and subjective, i think, the lack of legislation does not preclude the study of the theory, on the contrary, a sound theoretical research helps legislation improve and enhance the norms of criminal law is the basic norms of social life, it is to defend the countrys security, to defend the power of the country, maintaining social stability and peoples basic rights, and promote the prosperity of the nation, therefore, the provisions of the criminal law to strive for perfection, the need for a sound the theoretical basis of the amendments to the criminal law a few times just goes to show this point, but with the development of society, social risk costs continue to increase the wrong theoretical research to perfect, some people may not be legal sanctions. so there is no doubt that china should recognize the establishment of common criminal negligence. second, admit fault common crime can better maintain the crime and the criminal law to adapt to this fundamental principle. << >> 5 of the criminal law of the peoples republic of china for a long time a clear regulatory provisions: “the severity of the penalty should be the crime by an offender and bear criminal responsibility in the handling of the case should be followed felony subject to heavy penalties, misdemeanor light punishment, innocence impunity, do not live up vertical in a common criminal, both per capita is at fault, investigated responsibility, all cf a fault assertion is not practical, the other penalties are not in compliance with the legal requirements, but to distinguish between common crime of negligence and negligence at the same time offenders difference negligence while committing no common not pay attention to obligations. again, the existing common theory of crime, for the negligence of common crime in the common meaning contacted differences, considered from the point of view of social harmony, and criminal law to maintain social protection point of view, you can c