On "Public Place" In Criminal Law

All the crime of criminal law must be in a certain place,when discuss criminal law theory,the focus of the scholars study is not the location elements,so you also often ignore the problem,but the specific provisions of criminal law on the word "public" stressed that the from all walks of life to the meaning of the "public place" that conclusion is not unified,for instance the convicted would question,Therefore,its connotation needs to be deeply interpreted.The disputes on the issue of "public places" from all walks of life can be summarized into two points: first,what is the judgment standard of "public places" in the criminal law,and what specific judgment factors should there be? The second is whether the scope of "public places" is limited to physical places in reality,and whether it can be covered in cyberspace.In view of the current theory and practice of chaos phenomenon,the article on the basis of the "public" elements of interpretation,by combing and analyzing the elements of crime,stipulated by the legislation original intention and the elements of nature,from the overall Angle first to determine the interpretation of the "public" standard,and then from the Angle of all kinds of charges under perfect judgment elements of "public",It also makes a comprehensive interpretation of "public places" from the perspective of whether "places" require reality,and finally verifies and explains the conclusion with practice.To be specific,the whole article consists of four parts.First of all,because the provisions of "public place" require systematic thinking among different charges in the chapter,the relevant crimes with the word "public place" in the legal norms are sorted out in the form of two tables.Then,according to the provisions of the elements of "public places" in specific charges as the standard,to the legal interests of the violation of each charge as the standard,to the standard of the normative role of the elements of "public places" in specific charges as the standard for classification,a systematic understanding of the elements of "public places" in legal norms,to build a problematic way of thinking.In the second chapter,the legislative intention of "public places" is analyzed.Because of the "public" elements have specific properties in the different charges,some of the "public" crime involving "public safety",some "public" crime about "public morality",some "public" crime related to "maintain public order",some "public" criminal damage has increased effect,for the benefit Therefore,the legislator only stipulated the element of "public place" in the eleven crimes.At the same time,some criminal behaviors have certain characteristics,which makes it impossible to complete the behaviors in public places.Or some crime nature factor existence and indiscriminate,"public" in other words,the nature of its certain crimes also won’t affect social harmfulness in public places,or while increasing social harmfulness,but not for the crime of criminal law regulation,or although by criminal law regulation,but also can’t aggravate punishment,Therefore,the legislator did not stipulate the element of "public place" in other crimes.In the third part of the article,it is clear that the attribute of the element of "public place" in the related charges is the element of the standard constitution,so it is necessary to properly explain the element of "public place".At the same time,the interpretation standard of the element of "public place" in criminal law is determined.In this regard,the author first explains "public places" from the whole point of view,and creatively proposes that the key "public" interpretation line of "public places" should be based on"public life" as the structure,and "unspecified majority people" as the standard to restrict.However,this kind of judgment has relativity,firstly because of the ambiguity of"majority" and "non-specific" itself,secondly because of the particularity of legal interests involved in crimes like rape,thirdly,some problems in practice cannot be solved by relying on general judgment rules.Therefore,it is necessary to add an interpretation standard of "the public life of the non-specific majority"--"the understanding of the average person".Then from the perspective of all kinds of charges to improve the interpretation of the standard,that is,in the crime of endangering public security,we need to consider whether the object of the crime will expand the influence of the possible;In the crime of infractions on rights,it is necessary to make appropriate expanded interpretation and pay attention to the judgment of "public" situation.Even if it is a private place in principle,it may be identified as a public place according to factors such as public life and specific facts of the case.In the crime of property infringement,the identification of public places in "pickpocketing" should be properly expanded.The relatively small and closed places may also belong to public places.In the crime of disturbing public order,"large places" and "real people" are the key.Then,it makes a comprehensive interpretation of the study of "public places" from the perspective of whether "places" require realism.First,it analyzes the focus of disputes among scholars and aims at the opposing views raised by scholars.Found that scholars claim request body free access to "public" and "inappropriate to replace" public order "and" public order "and" stir-up-trouble crime behavior and result in site must be for the same location"reasonable requirements,such as not according to,on the basis of the claim under the network space in some charges can also be identified as" public ",That is to claim the existence of network public places and prove it.In the fourth part of the article,five typical cases on the identification of "public places" in practice are used to prove the above conclusions.Through the identification of a specific crime,a relatively abstract standard of concrete proof is summarized,so as to make the interpretation conclusion more reasonable.