According to judicial practice, there are several common discretionary circumstances in criminal law: 1. criminal means. When specific means are part of the constituent elements (behavior) of a crime, they do not belong to the sentencing circumstances; therefore, the criminal means here refer to means that do not belong to the constituent elements. The cruelty and cunningness of criminal means directly indicate the degree of harm of the crime, thereby affecting sentencing. If the injury is cruel, it will affect the sentencing. 2. The time, space and environmental conditions of the crime. The time, place and environmental conditions of the crime are different, which can also indicate the different social harm of the behavior, so they are factors that affect sentencing. For example, crimes committed when serious natural disasters such as earthquakes occur are more harmful than crimes committed in ordinary times and must be considered when sentencing. 3. The object of the crime. In the case where the criminal law does not stipulate specific objects as constitutive elements, the specific distinction between criminal objects reflects the degree of social harm of the behavior, and is therefore a circumstance that needs to be considered when sentencing. For example, the harm of stealing emergency and disaster relief funds is more serious than the harm of general public and private property, and should be treated differently when sentencing. 4. Harmful consequences of criminal behavior. When the harmful result is not a component of the crime, the severity of the harmful result (including direct results and indirect results) plays an important role in explaining the social harm of the behavior, and therefore becomes an important factor that should be considered when sentencing. For example, if the same person conceals or destroys other people's letters, but the number of concealed or destroyed letters and the consequences are different, the sentencing should be different. 5. Criminal motives. Different criminal motives directly indicate the different culpability of the perpetrators, and therefore are factors that must be considered when sentencing. For example, if both committed murder intentionally, some out of righteous indignation and some out of adultery, then the two would reflect different degrees of guilt, and there should be differences in sentencing. 6. Attitude after committing the crime. The attitude after the crime reflects the degree of personal danger of the offender and should be taken into consideration when sentencing. For example, some people confess their crimes after committing a crime, actively return the stolen goods and take the initiative to compensate for the losses. Some people stubbornly resist after committing a crime, hide the stolen goods and blackmail the victim. This reflects the different personal dangers of travelers and the different difficulty of rehabilitation, which must be treated differently when sentencing. 7. The offender’s consistent behavior. The criminal's consistent performance is neither the basis for conviction nor the main basis for sentencing, but the consistent performance closely related to the criminal behavior is a factor that should be considered when sentencing, because this factor also reflects the personal danger of the perpetrator. For example, if two criminals steal the same amount of property, and one frequently commits petty theft and the other has no bad behavior, the former should be given a heavier sentence than the latter. 8. Criminal record. A criminal record refers to the fact that a person has been criminally punished in accordance with the law (see Article 100 of the Criminal Law). If he commits a crime after receiving criminal punishment in accordance with the law, it means that the perpetrator's personal danger is serious and the sentencing circumstances should be considered. However, if it constitutes a recidivist or a specific recidivist (Article 65 of the Criminal Law), it is a statutory circumstance. If you need a more detailed answer, you can consult the website. We have a professional team of lawyers to serve you.
Legal objectivity:
"Interpretations of the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Laws in Handling Criminal Cases of Theft" Article 7 If the amount of public or private property stolen is relatively large, the perpetrator If a person pleads guilty, regrets, returns stolen goods or compensates, and meets one of the following circumstances, and the circumstances are minor, he may not be prosecuted or be exempted from criminal punishment; if necessary, the relevant departments will impose administrative penalties: (1) There are statutory lenient circumstances; ( 2) He did not participate in the distribution of stolen goods or the stolen goods were small and he was not the principal culprit; (3) The victim understood; (4) Other circumstances were minor and harmless.