On The Judicial Determination Of The Crime Of Endangering Precious And Endangered Wild Animals

In recent years,cases involving artificial breeding of wild animals have frequently appeared in the press,many in the form of legal but unreasonable verdict impact on the public’s simple legal feelings and intuition of justice,judicial determination rules have come to the point of having to change.The problem is that the Criminal Law does not clarify the substantive meaning of "precious and endangered wildlife",and judicial interpretations have long been sweepingly incorporating artificially bred wildlife into the scope of criminal law protection,with some acts that are not legally invasive to precious and endangered wildlife resources being criminalized.The two high authorities have introduced the "2022 Wildlife Interpretation",but the new interpretation still does not clarify the criminal law nature of artificially bred wildlife,and only gives a general judgment on the processing rules,making it difficult to fundamentally solve similar problems.Artificially bred wildlife cases have their own special characteristics and complexity,in objective terms,whether the loss of precious and endangered artificially bred animals still belong to precious and endangered animals,which is faced with the conflict between comprehensive protection of wildlife and respect for common sense and common sense,should be excluded from the precious and endangered wildlife resources without the legal benefits of the invasive behavior;in subjective terms,the perpetrator generally feels that the sale of artificially bred wildlife does not violate the criminal law,which should pay attention to the wrong perception of illegality,the existence of error inevitable situation will affect the responsibility.This article takes the case of Qiu Moumou’s sale of endangered wild animals as an example,analyzes and studies the issues involved in the case,and finally draws conclusions and recommendations.The whole paper is divided into four parts:The first part is the introduction,including the background and significance of the study,literature review,and research methodology.The second part is a brief overview of the case and the focus of controversy.Through a brief review of the case,the focus of controversy in this case is whether the parrot in question belongs to the scope of protection of this crime;whether the sale and purchase of the artificially bred parrot in question is illegal;and whether Qiu’s ignorance of the violation of criminal law in the sale and purchase of Fei’s love parrot affects his responsibility.The third part is a case review,combining laws and regulations,academic views,and using the three-level theory to place the focus of controversy in different levels of analysis.The parrot involved in the case is in Appendix II of CITES,which belongs to the scope of protection of this crime according to the current actual law,and Qiu’s behavior should be considered as a constituent element of this crime.In the class of illegality,this crime should adhere to the view of substantive legal benefit,Qiu’s behavior did not infringe on the precious and endangered wildlife resources as the legal benefit of this crime,so it does not have substantive illegality.Based on the position of legal doctrine,further analysis even if Qiu’s behavior is consistent with the illegality of this crime,but it does not constitute intentional,and due to the reliance on the government department’s response and there is an inevitable error in the perception of illegality,and finally a comprehensive conclusion that Qiu does not constitute a crime against precious and endangered wildlife.The fourth part is to think about the recommendations,in response to the common problems that arise in the class cases,for the first time should optimize the antecedent law basis of this crime,the dynamic adjustment and timely update of the relevant list,including specifically the "State Key Protection Animal List" "Artificial Breeding State Key Protection Catalog";secondly,considering the special nature of this crime,can be introduced in minor cases of illegal acquisition,transportation and sale of artificially bred animals Secondly,considering the special nature of this crime,the principle of "first-time offender exemption" can be introduced in minor cases of illegal acquisition,transportation and sale of artificially bred animals to broaden the path of crime.