The Controversy Over The Crime Of "Drunk Driving Case " And Its Enlightenment

In view of the frequent occurrence of drunk driving cases,it has brought great harm to our lives and property safety.In our country’s criminal law,the crimes of drunk driving are based on the different levels of danger of drunk driving behavior and the subjective mentality of the perpetrator’s harmful consequences.Different criminal law crimes and sentencing circumstances are set.In the judicial practice,there have been disagreements on the crimes of drunk driving accidents,which led to the existence of different judgments in the same case,which undermined the predictability of criminal law in China and the doubt of judicial injustice.Therefore,it is necessary for us to conduct in-depth research on the legal application of drunk driving crimes.First of all,starting with the real case that the author assisted in handling,the conviction disputes in the cases of drunk driving cases were elaborated.At the same time,a comparative analysis of other drunk driving cases with similar crime scenarios but different referee results suggests that it is necessary to systematically study the conviction of drunk driving cases.Secondly,it mainly studies the case of drunk driving accidents and is convicted of traffic crimes or dangerous methods of endangering public safety.Through the big data analysis of the conviction of dangerous crimes against public safety crimes and traffic accidents through drunk driving behavior,it can be seen that in the judicial practice,the conviction and sentencing of the two crimes under drunk driving behavior is more chaotic.The case that the author had previously represented was not a case but was universal.Therefore,it is urgent to understand the crime of traffic accidents and the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous methods in the constitutional standards of crime composition and practice.According to the provisions of Article 133 of the Criminal Law of China on the crime of traffic accidents and the provisions of Article 115 of the Criminal Law on the crime of endangering public security by dangerous methods,it can be seen that the latter’s sentencing is significantly higher than the former.There are obvious differences between the two crimes in terms of subjective and objective aspects of crime.Therefore,the author proposes that the conviction of drunk driving anecdotes needs to solve two problems.First,combined with the facts of the case to analyze whether the drunk driving behavior of the perpetrator has reached dangerous arbitrage with arson and explosion;secondly,combining the facts of the case to analyze the subjective mentality of the perpetrator on the harmful consequences is intentional Still faulty.In order to accurately judge the above two aspects in judicial practice,the author proposes that the two crimes can be identified from two angles.First,when the drunk driving behavior has a slight harmful consequence,it is determined by the dangerous driving crime.However,if more than one person is seriously injured or killed,it is an imaginary competing criminal,and it should be investigated according to the heavier crime.criminal responsibility.Second,in the case of serious harm to drunk driving behavior,if it is a collision,it is generally convicted of traffic accidents,but if there is sufficient evidence to prove that the perpetrator has hope for the occurrence of the hazard or The laissez-faire mentality is convicted of a dangerous method of endangering public safety.In the case of a secondary collision,it is generally criminalized as a dangerous method of endangering public safety.The above method is simple and easy to learn.In the second half of the second chapter,the author’s drunk driving accidents that have serious consequences in practice are not in conformity with the constitutive elements of the crime of jeopardizing public safety by dangerous methods,but they are analyzed according to the reasons for the conviction and sentencing of this crime.One reason is that the impact of criminal policy,the crime of jeopardizing public safety by dangerous methods,itself has legislative flaws and judicial activities are affected by public opinion.Finally,in the thoughts and perfection suggestions for the conviction and suppression of drunk driving cases,the author has put forward four suggestions for perfection in combination with the problems of conviction and sentencing in the drunk driving cases mentioned above.Specifically,the crime of jeopardizing public safety by dangerous methods can be clarified through legislation to clarify many vague concepts in the crime.At the same time,the author puts forward feasible judgment logic to solve the malpractice of the constituent elements;It can be considered to increase the statutory sentence period and upgrade the original statutory minimum penalty of 3 years or less to a fixed-term imprisonment or a single penalty.The perpetrators of minor crimes may adopt probation,exemption or single-penalty,and impose heavier penalties on subjectively vicious perpetrators,which is conducive to the implementation of the punishment policy of lenient and strict.In the criminal subject of the crime,it may be considered to include the relevant personnel such as persuasion and alcohol in the scope of adjustment;to play the role of the Supreme Court’s guiding case in the drunk driving case,and to guide the disciplinary actions of the courts at all levels through the guidance of guiding cases The application of the law to reduce the occurrence of different judgments in the same case;adhere to the judicial independence and rational treatment of public opinion,not easily shaken by the "public opinion trial" to ensure the seriousness of judicial decisions.