The Juristic Analysis Of The Case Of LiQiming

The case of LiQiming has generated an collision between judicative practice and theresearch of theory, meanwhile there exist an conflict of traditional criminal law and GermanJapanese criminal law. From the constitution of violation and liability’s constitutiverequirements, closed campus is not belong to range of public traffic management, the offenderis systematic indulgent but not negligent in mentality, so it excludes the charge of trafficaccident’s judicial judgment. And since German and Japanese criminal law’s argument aboutthe definition of “the equivalent danger” can’t be practiced readily and have no more supportof theory, so it should be denied, too. Thus the case must be charged the charge of threatenpublic safe. Besides, it bases on the criminal reconciliation to reconcile the heavy crime intolight crime, so it triggers the question of the limitation of criminal reconciliation, i.e whetherthe charge can be the object of criminal reconciliation. New modification Criminal ProcedureLaw has made a Prohibitive provisions about this, If the charge can be reconciled, then itmeans the cause of the court will be instead by the will of the parties, so the standard of thedefinition of this. New modification Criminal Procedure Law has made a Prohibitiveprovisions about this, and has improved it in it’s system and content, still it must be improvedin the exaggeration of object’s range and the host of it, and the means of practice theresponsibility and so on, thus push criminal justice’s achievement in the unity of social effectand legal effect.