Research On The Incrimination Standard Of False Litigation Action

With the accelerated development of a society governed by the rule of law and the effectiveness of legal-literacy,the legal awareness and literacy of citizens is also increasing.The protection of one’s rights and interests through litigation has gradually become the first choice when one’s rights and interests are damaged,but this has also turned into a secret channel for certain criminals to illegally enrich themselves.In order to achieve their illegal objectives,perpetrators apply to the judiciary for litigation with facts or evidence that do not actually exist,in the vain hope that their illegal objectives will be legality by the effective decisions made by the judiciary.Fraudulent litigation is complex and covert,and its harm is not negligible,not only will cause damage to the legitimate interests of others,and may even disrupt the order of the trial,causing serious obstacles to the development of the rule of law society.In response to changes in social practice,China’s criminal law has created a new offence of "false litigation" by way of an amendment,and has since issued two judicial interpretations to refine the information related to this offence.However,the legal text of the description of false litigation is slightly simple,so that the practical and theoretical circles in the definition of false litigation controversy.In this paper,we analyze the sample cases retrieved by way of empirical research,sort out the problems arising in practice,summarize the law of conviction for false litigation,and put forward some feasible suggestions for the definition of the crime of false litigation from three aspects: the existence of problems,objective behavior and harmful consequences.Firstly,we will analyze the different objects of crime in practice and the ambiguity of the incrimination criteria,so as to clarify the underlying causes and lay the foundation for the subsequent judgment of the standard.Secondly,to accurately grasp the exact meaning of the constituent elements of "fabricating facts to initiate civil proceedings",to clarify the scope of regulation of each,and to make the definition of objective conduct more specific.Once again,we will study the types of conduct and criteria for judging "obstruction of the judicial order",so that the crime can only be established if the perpetrator’s false litigation has caused the judiciary to take substantial trial activities,consume a large amount of judicial resources and damage the judicial order to a significant extent.Finally,the "serious","others" and "legitimate rights and interests" for in-depth analysis,clear "serious damage to the legitimate rights and interests of others " The scope of the regulation of different cases of false litigation must be grasped and measured differently.