A Study On The Criterion For The Determination Of "Serious Circumstances" Of The Crime Of Refusing To Execute A Judgment Or Written Order

In order to punish Lao Lai’s behavior,the judicial department of our country will independently convict the crime of refusing to execute the verdict,but because the time for conviction of refusing to execute the verdict is short,it is difficult to execute in the social environment of "difficult execution".The author thinks that the current situation of the crime of refusing to execute a verdict is difficult to execute.Although there are many environmental factors,the key factor is the inconsistency of the criteria for determining the crime of refusing to execute a verdict,especially the ambiguity of the criteria for determining the "serious circumstances",which leads to the fact that in judicial practice,judges do not know how to judge the refusal to execute beyond the "serious circumstances" stipulated by law and can only rely on it.Their understanding of the law and their experience in handling cases will inevitably lead to the imbalance of penalty discretion.Therefore,it is of great practical significance to study the criteria for determining the "serious circumstances" of the crime of refusing to execute a verdict.Starting from several typical cases,this paper draws out the main controversial focus of the current criteria for determining the "serious circumstances" of refusing to execute a verdict in judicial practice: is refusing to restore the status quo a "serious circumstances" of refusing to execute a verdict? Does the act of hiding and evading execution belong to the "serious circumstances" of refusing to execute the judgment? Can the amount of the subject matter of execution be used as the criterion for judging the "serious circumstances" of refusing to execute the judgment? Why is the public prosecution law different in determining whether the plot of a private prosecution case meets the criterion of "serious circumstances" of refusing to execute a judgment? As well as the "serious circumstances" determination standard of refusing to execute judgment in case handling,such as the unclear provisions of the determination standard,the inconsistent determination standard,the excessive freedom of sentencing,the imbalance of criminal law discretion and so on,and make a detailed jurisprudential analysis of the focus of these disputes combined with the case.The author believes that the type of case,the amount of theexecution target and the social impact,and the execution should be considered.The nature of human behavior,personal harmfulness and the harmful consequences caused by it are comprehensively identified as "serious circumstances" of refusing to execute the verdict.Finally,the author puts forward four aspects to improve the criteria for determining "serious circumstances" from the following four aspects: defining the applicable provisions of the crime of refusing to execute judgments,refining the provisions of "serious circumstances",revising the specific ideas of the relevant legislative provisions,and revising the judicial interpretation in 2015.Finally,the author puts forward four aspects to improve the standard of "serious circumstances" determination,namely,defining the applicable provisions of the crime of refusing to execute judgments,refining the provisions of "serious circumstances",revising the specific ideas of relevant legislative provisions,and revising the judicial interpretation in 2015.