Research On Criminal Liability Of "Partial Tampering" False Litigation Behavior

The 2018 Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Handling Criminal Cases of False Lawsuits,jointly issued by the judicial departments,clearly declares that false lawsuits that are "partially tampered with" do not constitute a false lawsuit crime.However,at the level of partial falsification and fabrication of facts;there is a big controversy in criminal law academia and judicial practice.After the implementation of the "Interpretation",the false lawsuit "partial falsification" false lawsuit jurisprudence accounted for more than three layers.Apparently,the judicial practice sector has not responded to the judgment of the Interpretation on this issue in a very unusual way,This has led to judicial confusion over the current scope of application of the crime of false prosecution.The reasons for the decriminalization of "partial falsification" of false litigation are as follows: First,to ensure consistency in the interpretation of criminal law,the concept of "fabrication" is defined as "fiction".The first is to ensure consistency in the interpretation of criminal law,the concept of "fabrication" is defined as "fiction","fictional".However,this interpretation must be consistent with the original intent of the law,that is,to include the possible future crimes,so in this case,to maintain the consistency of this interpretation is obviously inappropriate.Because the interpretation should be in line with the legislative intent,or should have to cover possible future crimes,it is obviously inappropriate to outlaw the crime in order to maintain the uniformity of the interpretation.Second: for part of the tampering with the right to sue caused by the lawsuit is not defined as the crime of false litigation.But "part of the tampering" of the false lawsuit because of the tampering of the legal elements,obviously the formation of a new legal relationship,the court in the investigation of the original commission is bound to spend more energy,undoubtedly cause greater harm to the judicial order.Third: in order to protect the right to litigation considerations,will be classified as a false lawsuit,thus violating the people’s right to litigation,will improperly increase the fight against crime.But this move will undoubtedly create a legal vacuum for some speculative elements.Fourth;lack of repeatability.Judicial practice,"part of the tampering" of the specific implementation of different methods,to regulate it,I’m afraid it is difficult to implement in judicial practice.In fact,the severity of the punishment can be reasonably determined according to the consequences of the object it affects.The severity of the penalty can be reasonably determined depending on the consequences resulting from the object of its tampering.Fifth: Outlawing does not make the crime indulgent.But doing so will aggravate the confusion in the application of the crime in law,for example;treating fraud as a way to commit a crime will inevitably cause the problem of imaginary competition between false prosecution and fraud crimes,thus inadvertently narrowing the scope of application of the crime,so the issue of the Explanation of the out crime is worth exploring.And from the situation of judicial practice,whether it is unilateral false fraud,or malicious collusion between the parties,will cause some damage to the judicial order.The unreasonable part of the above interpretation has been discussed earlier,"fabrication" should be interpreted substantively,the-so-called substantive interpretation refers to whether the act violates the legal interests of the crime,so objectively speaking,"partial tampering" is a disguised "fabrication".The "fabrication" should be recognized as a false lawsuit.litigation.