Research In The Field Of Rights-whether The Extortion Constitute A Crime

Assets-offending crime is an important part of criminal law, withdual characteristics of antiquity and novelty. Extortion that belongs toassets-offending crime has a variety of forms with the advance of the wheel ofhistory and the rapid development of social economy. Once the legal provisionis confirmed, it will not easily change. What’s more, Mainland China hasdeveloped the corresponding law to extortion, which still has many defects andcan’t do everything. We often encounter some problems about the big differenceexisting in convicting for extortion, which becomes the focus issue of domesticlegal professional field and practical field. On the other hand, with the constantdevelopment of legal construction, legal concepts of our citizens continue tobe strengthened. As a result, more and more people who suffer from illegalinfraction will seek legal tools to obtain assistance in order to protect theirlegitimate rights and interests. Due to the complex social environment,situations that citizens’ rights are being infringed are different and not allsituations can follow the same legal provisions for intervention and relief. Afact that can’t be denied is that the public relief of safeguarding the rightsis deficiency or even being absent. Therefore, when public relief can’t resolve the problem about damaging the rights promptly and efficiently, subject of theright should be allowed to conduct private relief, which is self-relief, withina certain degree and scope. However, domestic law has not enact well-developedprivate relief provisions, as well as the big difference among different mainbody about their deposition to rule of law and subjective judgment, there is abig difference between the means of self-help. In real life, some citizens mayeven adopt theft, kidnapping, fraud, extortion and other means of self-help, whichis clearly contrary to the spirit of the law and has aroused great concern inlegal professional field and practical field. Particularly in the areas ofconsumer rights, we can often see that consumer use threats, coercion way tosafeguard the legitimate interests of individuals. Distinction between extortionthat belongs to maintain the right field is a gray area exists in the boundarybetween civil and criminal law. It is also a perplexing problem in judicialpractice.This article is from within the boundaries of activists working in the fieldof crime or extortion, criminal conduct constituted extortion analysis, combiningtheoretical developments at home and abroad about the exercise of rights andextortion conduct research aimed at resolving the rights recognized in the fieldextortion finds many confused.In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper is divided intofour parts. The first chapter, the paper selects the representative rights inrecent years, the field of alleged extortion case,that although he had purchasedbecause of quality defects computer to the threat of exposure to the news media,Asustek Computer Inc. to raise huge amounts of claims. This paper analyzes theclassic case to illustrate the focus of controversy within the activist allegedextortion identified areas: First, subjectively, how to determine the behaviorof human existence " illegal possession ";Second, objectively, how to determinethe perpetrator constitute extortion of "blackmail " means. Secondly, in thesecond chapter of the constituent elements of extortion specific objective andsubjective aspects of the analysis, the argument from a different angle, through the collision theory of criminal law, established in extortion subjective aspect(purpose of illegal possession of identified) with the objective aspect(racketeering judgment means) conviction standards.Again, this articlediscusses the third chapter in the outer region on the right to exercise theboundaries of research and extortion problem.These problems not only in ourcountry rather controversial judicial practice and judicial practice in foreigncountries are also inconclusive. Comprehensive experience abroad and domesticscholars research the judiciary, the exercise of the right behavior, the overalltrend is not to be punished for crimes against property，but the boundariesbetween the two judgments on the following two aspects: First, whether theperpetrator to exercise their rights is based on legitimate legal basis; Second,whether the perpetrator means to exercise their rights more than the limits ofthe law. Finally, in contrast to the analysis of the second chapter and ChapterIII of the conclusions of the study，started from extortion subjective andobjective analysis of constituent elements of the defenders had to be integratedwith extortion when，and be differentiated according to the specific circumstancesto activists seeking to clarify the boundaries of the field of crime or extortion.