On The Cognition Of Illegality Of Legal Crime

In the face of the increasing social reality of legal offenders,the principle of "ignorance of law without exemption" is no longer in line with the practical needs,and the responsibility standard should be re-established.Whether the actor’s lack of understanding of the illegality of the act can affect his responsibility in the legal crime has attracted more and more attention from both theoretical and practical circles.To discuss the cognition of illegality of legal offence,we need to clarify three questions: first,why the cognition of illegality of legal offence has the value of separate discussion;Second,what is the position of the cognition of illegality in the elements of intention and responsibility? Thirdly,how to recognize the illegality in the legal offense.In order to fully explain the above problems,this paper is divided into three parts:First of all,this paper briefly discusses the concept of legal crime,mainly introduces the difference between legal crime and natural crime in nature.In natural crimes,the judge usually acquiesces that the doer has a certain understanding of legal norms,but not in legal crimes.Therefore,it is possible that th evalue pursuit of social fairness and justice cannot be realized to treat legal crimes according to the standard of imputation applied to natural crimes.This is the starting point of studying the cognition of illegality in legal crime.In the process of defining the cognition of illegality,on the one hand,this paper discusses the evaluation object of the cognition of illegality,that is,whether the actor should have the cognition of result in intentional crime and negligent crime,behavior crime and dangerous crime.On the other hand,this paper also discusses the meaning of illegality in the understanding of illegality.As for the relation between illegality cognition and social harmfulness cognition,this paper thinks that we should attach importance to the independence of illegality cogn ition and should not confuse the two.Secondly,regarding the legal attribute of the cognition of illegality in the legal crime,there are differences between the theory of intention and the theory of responsibility.After making clear the premise that intention is not the element of liability but the element of illegality,this paper continues to discuss the position of illegality in the legal crime.This is because if intention is the element of liability,there is no difference between the theory of intention and the theory of liability,and this issue becomes a "false proposition".From the perspective of retaining the independence of intentional fact,standardizing the definition of liability and the difference between intent and negligence,this paper argues that the theory of limited liability is more reasonable,and the possibility of illegality is the essential factor of liability.Finally,"whether the actor has the possibility of knowing illegality" and "whether the error of illegality can be avoided" are essentially the same problem when discussing the application path of the possibility of knowing illegality.Different standards should be applied flexibly depending on the specific case,and the doer standard and the average person standard can also be applied comprehensively if necessary.When investigating whether the misperception of ill egality of the actor can be avoided,it can be determined from two aspects: one is whether the actor has the opportunity to find out the truth;The second is whether the actor made full use of the opportunity.This paper also selects three representative cases to show the feasibility of the theory and solution prop osed in this paper in practice.