The film uses realistic themes and the perspective of small people as an incision to show the axioms and human feelings behind Article 20 of the Criminal Law on "legitimate defense".
The main case of the film is oneAnti-homicide cases caused by illegal debt collectionIn order to collect debts, the village tyrant killed the victim's dog, chained her husband to the door with a dog chain, and even threatened to use a knife to use a knife, in fear and despair, the husband picked up a pair of scissors and stabbed him, causing the village tyrant to be seriously injured and later died.
The 2024 law candidates should not just watch a simple movie, because the test center behind "Article 20" is really what law candidates need to pay attention to.
Accurately grasp the causal conditions for legitimate defense. The premise of justifiable defense is the existence of an unlawful offense. Unlawful infringement includes acts that infringe not only on the rights to life and health, but also on personal freedom, public and private property, and other rights; This includes both criminal and illegal acts. Unlawful aggression should not be unduly confined to violence or criminal acts. Defenses may be exercised against unlawful encroachments such as unlawful restrictions on the personal liberty of others or illegal intrusion into the homes of others. Unlawful infringement includes not only unlawful infringement against oneself, but also unlawful infringement that endangers the state, public interest, or others. Defenses may be exercised against ongoing illegal and criminal acts that impede safe driving or endanger public safety, such as pulling the steering wheel and beating the driver. Adults shall dissuade and stop unlawful violations against other minors that minors are currently committing; Where dissuasion or suppression is ineffective, defense may be exercised.
Accurately grasp the time conditions for justifiable defense. Justifiable defence must be directed against an ongoing wrongful offense. Where the unlawful offense has already formed a real and imminent danger, it shall be found that the unlawful offense has already begun; Where the unlawful offense is temporarily interrupted or temporarily stopped, but there is still a realistic possibility that the unlawful offender will continue to carry out the offense, it shall be found that the unlawful offense is still ongoing; In property crimes, where the unlawful offender has already obtained property, but the property can be recovered through measures such as chasing or blocking, it may be viewed that the unlawful offense is still ongoing; Where the unlawful offender has truly lost the capacity to infringe or has truly given up the violation, it shall be found that the unlawful infringement has ended. As to whether the unlawful offense has begun or ended, a reasonable judgment shall be made in accordance with law based on the circumstances in which the defender was in the defense, and in accordance with the general understanding of the public, and the defender must not be demanded. Where defenders have a misunderstanding of whether the unlawful offense has begun or ended due to panic, nervousness, or other such factors, they shall be appropriately handled in accordance with law in accordance with the principle of unity of subjectivity and objectivity.
Accurately grasp the conditions for the object of legitimate defense. Justifiable defence must be carried out against the wrongdoer. Where multiple people jointly commit an unlawful offense, they may be defended against both the person who directly committed the unlawful offense and the person who jointly committed the unlawful offense at the scene. Where it is clearly known that the violator is a person with no capacity for criminal responsibility or a person with limited capacity for criminal responsibility, other methods shall be used to avoid or stop the infringement as much as possible; Where there is no other way to avoid or stop the unlawful violation, or where the unlawful encroachment seriously endangers personal safety, a counterattack may be carried out.
Accurately grasp the conditions of intent for legitimate defense. Justifiable defence must be aimed at protecting the State, the public interest, the person, property and other rights of the person or others from unlawful infringement. Defensive provocation that intentionally uses words, behavior, or so forth to provoke the other party to infringe upon oneself and then retaliates should not be found to be defensive conduct.
Accurately distinguish between defensive behavior and mutual fighting. Defensive conduct and mutual brawls have external similarities, and the principle of unifying subjectivity and objectivity should be adhered to in accurately distinguishing between the two, and the subjective intent and nature of the perpetrator's conduct should be accurately judged by comprehensively considering objective circumstances such as the cause of the case, whether there was fault for the escalation of the conflict, whether a murder weapon was used or was prepared to be used, whether obviously disproportionate violence was used, and whether others were gathered to participate in the fight.
A fight broke out over a dispute over a trivial matter, and neither side could exercise restraintFor the party at fault to act first and the means are obviously excessive, or one party to act first,Where the offense continues despite the other party's efforts to avoid conflict, the conduct of the party fighting back shall generally be found to be defensive conduct.
The two sides clashed over trivial matters, and after the conflict ended,One party commits another illegal offense, and the other party fights backIncluding the use of tools to fight back, it shall generally be found to be an act of defense. The determination of the perpetrator's defensive intent cannot be affected simply because the perpetrator has made defensive preparations in advance.
Prevent abuse of the right of self-defense from being recognized as an act of defence。Where the perpetrator directly uses methods sufficient to cause serious injury or death to stop an obviously minor unlawful offense when it can be identified, it should not be found to be an act of defense. Where the unlawful offense is caused by the perpetrator's gross negligence, and the perpetrator intentionally retaliates by means sufficient to cause serious injury or death even though other means may have been used to avoid the offense, it should not be found to be an act of defense.
In fact, in 2020, the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Court jointly issued the "Guiding Opinions" on legitimate defense, further emphasizing the need to effectively prevent and resolutely defend the erroneous practice of who can make trouble and who is justified and who is killed or injuredThe law cannot yield to lawlessnessThe spirit of the rule of law.
Every case must not only stand the test of the law, but also stand the test of people's hearts and history.
Finally, I hope that law candidates can have a deeper understanding and study, and collect them
Remember to leave a message with the first sister of the law exam** your thoughts