A Study On The Criminal Responsibility Of Successors In Joint Principal Offender

Inherited accomplices were first proposed by German scholars,and later the concept of inherited accomplices appeared.Successor co-principal offender refers to the situation in which the follower inherits the behavior of the predecessor and the consequences of the behavior,and thus needs to bear the responsibility of the co-principal offender.At present,although there is still controversy over the concept of inherited co-principal offenders in China,due to the use of many elements of quantitative elements in the Criminal Law Code of China,in order to fill the gap in penalties,it is necessary to recognize the existence of co-conducted offenders in China..At the same time,from the perspective of time,causality cannot be traced back to the past,so to what extent do the followers inherit the actions and consequences of the actions of the forerunners,and the extent to which they are responsible for the common culprits,the core issues.Therefore,on the basis of sorting out and comparing the theories of China and Japan,this article is based on the relationship between co-principles and causality inherited in the causal accomplice theory,and strives to explore a solution that can better solve China’s judicial practice problems.The first part of this article first divides the inherited common offender into two types of crimes: single offense and compound offender,and analyzes the relevant cases involving these two types of crimes,and summarizes the focus of the criminal liability of posterity.To better solve this problem,and further explore the content and characteristics of the inherited co-prisoners and the basis of punishment for co-prisoners.Focusing on the above-mentioned focus issues,the second and third parts of this article are the induction and evaluation of the existing theories in China and Japan,respectively.It mainly analyzes the advantages and disadvantages of the specific content of each doctrine,as well as the problems of the existing theories and solutions in the application of judicial practice.However,the proper handling of the results is not the end point of the inherited co-principles,and there must be a clear basis for the solution of this problem.Therefore,it remains to be discussed whether the above-mentioned solution can better solve the problem of criminal liability of later travellers.Through the induction and analysis of the Chinese and Japanese theories,the fourthpart of this article makes a comparative study of the theoretical theories of China and Japan.Through comparison,we know that the Chinese and Japanese theories in the development process and even the specific content of the doctrine,judgment steps and other aspects There are differences.Although this article insists on the principle of causality for the punishment of common principal offenders,it also has to admit that if the negation is completely adhered to,it is not conducive to the protection of legal interests,which is an excessive interpretation and application of the principle of restraint in criminal law.Therefore,the last part of this article,based on the previous four chapters,focuses on the "causality".Because the inherited co-prisoners exist in the latter part to participate in the crime midway,and they form a common intentional special crime with the pioneer in the middle.Happening.By investigating the causality here,this article reconstructs the judgment steps of the negation from the standpoint of basically adhering to the negation.Finally,the reconstructed negation theory is again applied to the four cases presented in Chapter One for analysis and verification to test whether the reconstructed negation theory can reasonably solve the problem of the criminal liability of the posterity.