Research On The Path To Escape From Crime For Abstract Dangerous Criminal

Early protection of legal interests is a practical need to prevent new risks and ensure social security.Abstract dangerous criminals have become the "darlings" of maintaining social harmony and stability today.However,the appearance form of the elements of abstract dangerous crime tends to make judicial personnel follow the plain meaning of written law and apply the law mechanically and blindly,resulting in unreasonable expansion of the scope of punishment.Therefore,it is necessary to sort out and deeply analyze the crux of the judicial determination of abstract dangerous crimes,so as to find the basic basis for constructing the path of abstract dangerous crimes,and to explore the specific path to solve the dilemma of crime.The full text is as follows:The first chapter is an overview of abstract dangerous offenses.First,the basic theory of abstract dangerous crime includes the concept,punishment basis and theoretical boundary of abstract dangerous crime.Defining the concept of abstract dangerous crime involves how to identify "abstract danger";the substantive judgment standard can make up for the defect that formal theory only pursues formal justice,"abstract danger" is the danger of result and presumption;The basis of abstract dangerous crime has certain rationality,and it can also be used as a way to distinguish the two by analyzing the form of infringement of legal interests.Concrete danger and abstract danger differ only in the degree of abstraction and the way of judging the facts as the basis for identification.The theory of degree of danger divides the two according to the degree of urgency that the dangerous state turns into the consequence of actual harm.Second,through different interpretations of the connotation of culpability,it is believed that the main body of culpability is the criminal judicial organ,and the target is the behavior that enters the criminal circle for evaluation,and a series of judicial behavior processes that are criminal in nature are excluded by combining entities and procedures.and a summary of the results.The second chapter is the investigation and reason analysis of abstract dangerous crime.In terms of problems,there is a tendency of over-criminalization in judicial practice.The misdemeanor crime of drunken driving,the felony crime of illegally manufacturing explosives,and the high-frequency crimes in the food and drug field involving people’s livelihood are selected as the perspectives to show this kind of crime.Tendency;the identification of statutory offenses in abstract dangerous forms relies too much on the prepositional law,especially in the identification of abstract dangerous offenses involving guns,counterfeit medicines,poisonous and harmful foods;it is easy to ignore the subjective elements in judicial practice and realize that the perpetrator Separation of attribution and subjective elements.In terms of reasons,the period of social transformation led to the alienation of the concept of criminal law,and the instrumental concept of criminal law flourished and pushed criminal law to omnipotence;criminal justice was separated from legal interests and mechanically applied the provisions of criminal law and judicial interpretation,falling into the quagmire of formalism;"As a reason for guilt at the dogmatic level,it is suspected of being ambiguous,and its application method is controversial,and it is prone to randomness in the application of the law.Apart from the "provoking" provisions,it lacks other effective ways of guilt.The third chapter is the basis for abstract dangerous criminals to construct the criminal path.It mainly considers the legitimacy of the path of guilt and expounds the theoretical basis of the path of guilt.The basis of legitimacy includes functional basis,idea basis and objective basis.When there is a conflict between the protection function of legal interests and the protection function of human rights,the criminal law must coordinate between the two to provide a functional basis for abstract dangerous criminals to explore the path of crime;It is determined that it is particularly important to adhere to the concept of modesty in the criminal law;in our country,the penalty system is too severe,and the impact of the penalty is directly linked to the life of returning to society,which leads to the objective needs of abstract and dangerous crime.In addition,as far as the theoretical basis of the abstract dangerous offense path is concerned,it is necessary to base on the guilt interpretation position of substantive interpretation,and to exclude acts that do not cause the danger of infringing legal interests from the criminal circle through the method of substantive interpretation;With the idea of of criminalization,the criminal entity and the criminal procedure are linked with the criminal policy to provide a systematic basis for the abstract dangerous crime.The fourth chapter is the positive investigation of the entity of the abstract dangerous crime path.By substantively explaining the constituent elements,it is positively examining whether there is an abstract danger.On the one hand,it should be guided by the protection of legal interests in specific provisions,and use the double-layered legal interest structure in abstract dangerous crimes to substantively understand the protection of legal interests of related crimes.On the other hand,in the criminal intention theory,it is clear that the knowledge of illegality belongs to the element of intention,and the perpetrator needs to know the own and legal attributes of his behavior and the dangerous consequences that his behavior may cause if he has criminal intention.The presumption can be made based on the perpetrator’s awareness of the dangerous state,the behavioral characteristics of the perpetrator,the occupational and technical proficiency of the perpetrator,and the criminal evidence already possessed by the prosecution.The fifth chapter is the program reverse exclusion of abstract dangerous criminal path.The procedural path is actually to make a substantive understanding of the crime,and reverse the existence of abstract danger in a case to commit the crime.On the one hand,the defendant should be allowed to present counter-evidence,and when there is no corresponding danger in a specific case,the introduction of the counter-evidence system will facilitate the conviction of individual special cases.It is more reasonable for the counter-evidence procedure to be conducted in the judicial trial stage,and it is more feasible for the defendant to claim,and evidence should be collected,presented and cross-examined in accordance with the law.On the other hand,from the perspective of defense,expert assistants are introduced to participate in cross-examination for substantive defense.The administrative determination opinion is not a documentary evidence and an appraisal opinion,but a "quasi-appraisal opinion".Judicial determination should be relatively independent from administrative pre-determination,and expert assistants should issue professional opinions to participate in cross-examination,eliminating the danger of abstraction only through formal examination.