| Under the legislation on the normalization of helping behaviors,the standard of practice is unclear as to whether the helping behaviors in the sub-rules are normalized,and they tend to be normalized.Before solving this problem,we must first respond to whether the system of distinction and the subordination of accomplices should be adhered to,because if the unitary system and the independence of accomplices are adopted,this question will no longer be a problem.Since the distinction system and accomplice affiliation have comparative advantages in the accomplice problem of identity offenders,the refinement of sentencing,and the limitation of the scope of punishment,the distinction system and accomplice affiliation must be adhered to.Under the distinction system,in view of the nature of the helping behavior in the sub-rules,from the narrow accomplice perspective,there is a formal standard theory that fully recognizes the positive nature of aiding behavior and a substantive standard theory that distinguishes the positive nature of aiding behavior.The former always believes that the helping behavior is normalized,resulting in an excessively wide range of punishment;the latter selectively denies that the helping behavior is normalized,and cannot provide a clear standard for normalization.From the perspective of accomplices in the narrow sense,helping behaviors are regarded as accomplices,so many problems arise.As long as it is acknowledged that "the separate rules stipulate that all crimes are committed" and that "the legislation has the authority to set new crimes",the independent status of the newly established helping crimes must be recognized.Based on this,the author constructs a dichotomous theory from the perspective of self-speaking and principal offenders.The core point is that the act of helping independently convicted is a new independent crime,the new crime and the crime being helped are equal,and the new crime and the crime being helped are complicit.There is a possibility of co-existence of the constituent elements,and it is also possible that only a helping charge can be established.Therefore,the legislation on the regularization of aiding acts can be divided into two categories:one is a helping crime that includes acts that constitute accomplices of other crimes,that is,behaviors that meet the constituent elements of a helping crime,and may be sufficient for the constituent elements of an accomplice in an aided crime.The other category is aiding crime that does not include acts that constitute accomplices.From the viewpoint of this paper,there is no basis for helping the problem of the conflict between the normalization of the behavior and the subordination of the accomplice,and the balance of punishment can be achieved,which can punish the crime without causing the scope of punishment to be too wide.In addition to the introduction,this paper is divided into five parts:The first part,an overview of the criminalization of helping behavior.Firstly,clarify the connotation of the criminalization of helping behaviors,and sort out the distribution of helping behaviors in the sub-rules.Second,study its basic types.The second part,explains the research premise of helping behavior to be criminalized.Firstly,it studies the criminal participation system,points out the problems existing in the unitary system,and supports the differentiated system.Secondly,discuss the relationship between the main offender and the accomplice,insist on the accomplice’s affiliation in the implementation of the subordination;insist on the restrictive subordination in the element’s subordination.The third part sorts out the theory of helping criminals from the perspective of accomplices in the narrow sense,and conducts a critical review.First,it sorts out the theory of formal standards,and points out its sparseness and the defects of expanding the scope of punishment;secondly,it analyzes the theories under the theory of substantive standards,and points out its inherent defect that it cannot provide a clear standard for identifying the main offender.Finally,the above points are summarized.The fourth part points out the crux of the dilemma of research,and on this basis,proposes a solution,and constructs a dichotomy from the perspective of self-speaking and criminals.First,through the clarification of the concept of positive offense,it is pointed out that the deviation of the research lies in the equating of the concept of positive offense with the implementation of behavioral errors.Secondly,from the perspective of the criminal,construct the self-theory-the dichotomy from the perspective of the criminal,and demonstrate its validity.The fifth part is the judicial application of the dichotomy from the perspective of the criminal.The problems of criminalizing helping behaviors are concentrated in national security,information network,prostitution,and terrorist activities.Therefore,this paper applies self-talk to these four types of crimes in order to provide reflections on solving practical problems. |
