Excessive Restriction Research Is Carried Out In Crowd Fighting

Affray has always been a more complex crime,because it involves not only joint crime,but also the imposition of excessive limits.As for the implementation of excessive limits,there are few theoretical studies in China,so there are also difficulties in judicial practice.Up to now,the theoretical circle has not formed a unified opinion on the judgment standard of the implementation of excessive limit,and the practical circle is also different in the determination of the implementation of excessive limit,so there will be a dilemma of different judgments in the same case.The identification standard and criminal responsibility of excessive limit in affray are the core problems of excessive limit in affray.Therefore,in order to solve the practical problems,it is necessary to study these two core problems.First wei-guo Chen,jian-hua yu intentional homicide and Mr Wang,Han Tao,Wang Yongyang intentional injury two typical cases,for example,points out that the judicial practice in affrays implement the contradiction of limit,a different kind of case sentenced to dilemma,which led to the core of the article-affrays has limited has different standards.Secondly,from the theoretical point of view,it first introduces the concepts related to the implementation of excessive limit,and then analyzes the identification principles of the implementation of excessive limit.Finally,it analyzes the theories highly recommended by the current academic circle,such as the theory of over common intention,the theory of knowledge,the theory of foresight,and points out the theoretical dilemma of the implementation of excessive limit.The third is the implementation of excessive limit in affray to improve the standard,from the principle of determination,legislation,theory,judicial four aspects of the specific improvement of the scheme.The last part is the key part of the full text,mainly on the basis of perfect identification standards,the distribution of criminal responsibility,to solve the problem of responsibility distribution in judicial practice.