Article 234 Whoever intentionally harms another person's body shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years, criminal detention or public surveillance.
Whoever commits the crime mentioned in the preceding paragraph and causes serious injuries shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than ten years; Whoever causes death or serious disability by particularly cruel means shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than 10 years, life imprisonment or death. Where there are other provisions in this Law, such provisions shall prevail.
The crime of intentional injury refers to the act of intentionally and illegally damaging the health of others. In judicial practice, we should pay attention to the following issues in the determination and punishment of this crime: The key to this crime is that 1 has illegally and intentionally harmed the health of others. In this regard, we should pay attention to the following two points: (1) The illegality of injury is the premise of this crime. If the injury is legal, such as self-defense or emergency avoidance, it does not constitute a crime; (2) The intentional injury of this crime must be the health of others. Self-injury behavior cannot constitute this crime, but it may constitute other crimes under special circumstances. For example, a soldier who injures himself in order to avoid military obligations in wartime shall be punished as the crime of wartime self-mutilation in accordance with the provisions of Article 434 of the Criminal Law.
The degree of injury that constitutes this crime is limited to three situations: minor injury, serious injury and death due to injury. Minor injuries and general beatings below minor injuries do not constitute this crime. The criteria for distinguishing serious injuries, minor injuries and minor injuries shall be based on the provisions of the Appraisal Criteria for Serious Injuries and Minor Injuries (Trial) jointly issued by the Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, the Ministry of Public Security and the Ministry of Justice.
The age of criminal responsibility of the subject of this crime has different requirements due to different degrees of injury. If serious injury or injury causes death, the age of criminal responsibility shall be above 14 and below 16; Those who cause minor injuries must be 16 years old to constitute this crime.
The crime of intentional injury clearly defined as other crimes in the criminal law should be convicted and punished in accordance with the relevant provisions of the criminal law, not as this crime.
Whoever commits this crime shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years, criminal detention or public surveillance; Those who cause serious injuries shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than 3 years 10 years; Whoever causes death or serious injury by particularly cruel means and causes serious disability shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than 10, life imprisonment or death.
In addition, according to relevant judicial interpretations, those who commit this crime may be deprived of political rights.
Determination of the crime of intentional injury
1 The crime of intentional injury and the crime of intentional homicide are not easy to distinguish in the following two cases: First, the crime of intentional injury and intentional homicide are completed; The second is intentional injury and attempted intentional homicide. The key to distinguish between the two is to find out the specific content of the perpetrator's criminal intention: pedestrians who have the intention to illegally deprive others of their lives, whether they cause death or not, should be considered as intentional homicide; If the behavior is only illegal and intentional, it can only be considered as intentional injury, regardless of whether it causes death to others.
In addition, we should also pay attention to the following three special situations: (1) If the criminal act is suddenly committed, the perpetrator's intentional content is uncertain or he is concerned about the casualties of others, he can generally be convicted according to the actual results. If it causes injury, it shall be convicted of intentional injury; Whoever causes death shall be convicted of intentional homicide; (2) If a fight causes death, in addition to the crime of intentional homicide, the crime of intentional injury to death can generally be determined. (3) Cases where the boundary between intentional injury and intentional homicide is really difficult to distinguish can generally be handled on the principle of no doubt.
The difference between the crime of intentional injury (death) and the crime of negligent death lies in whether the actor subjectively intentionally hurts others to death. Although the actor did not intentionally kill others, he deliberately harmed others' health, and the death result was completely caused by intentional injury. Negligence causes death, and the actor not only has no intention to kill, but also has no behavior that endangers the health of others, so the death result is completely caused by negligence.
For the determination of the degree of injury, we should pay attention to the comprehensive evaluation of the injury at that time and the results after treatment: if the situation was serious at that time and basically returned to normal after treatment or only formed minor injuries, it should be considered as minor injuries; At that time, the injury was not serious, but although it was serious after treatment, it should be considered serious.
Cases of intentional injury (minor injury) in the Supreme People's Court Research Office shall be handled by public security organs.
After the case of private prosecution is rejected, can the court answer the accepted questions?
(1994 65438+1October 27th)
Beijing Higher People's Court:
Your request for instructions on whether the court can file a new case for private prosecution has been received. After study, the reply is as follows:
Agree with the tendentious opinions of your hospital. In the case of intentional injury (minor injury) that has been revoked by the public security organ, if the victim files a criminal private prosecution on the same fact, which is in line with Article 61 of the Criminal Procedure Law and Article 2 (1) of the Provisions on the Examination and Filing of Criminal Private Prosecution Cases of our hospital1September 24, 993, the people's court shall file a case, and the time limit for prosecution shall not exceed; Do not meet the conditions for filing, not filing, and inform the private prosecutor of the reasons for not filing.
This reply
Case of intentional injury and obstruction of official duties by Lu and others
Beijing No.2 Intermediate People's Court
The verdict of criminal proceedings
No.02318 (2006) No.2 Middle School Criminal Final Word
The original public prosecution agency was the People's Procuratorate of Chaoyang District, Beijing.
Appellant (defendant in the original trial) Lu, male, 35 years old, born in August of197/kloc-0, Han nationality, junior high school education, unemployed, lives in Mentougou District of this city. He was sentenced to seven years' imprisonment on 1992 for committing theft; 1March, 999, sentenced to nine years in prison, deprived of political rights for two years, and fined RMB 20,000. Released after commutation on July 2, 2005. He was detained on June 5438+February 19, 2005, detained in criminal detention the next day, and arrested on June 5438+ 10/8, 2006. He is currently being held in Chaoyang District Detention Center in Beijing.
Appellant (defendant in the original trial) Ma Dongxing, male, 27 years old, 1979, 10 was born in Beijing on June 6th, Han nationality, junior high school education, farmer, and lives in Fangshan District of this city. In April 2000, he was sentenced to five years' imprisonment for robbery and fined RMB 12000. In June 2003, 65438+1October, 65438+1October was released after commutation. He was detained on June 5438+February 19, 2005, detained in criminal detention the next day, and arrested on June 5438+ 10/8, 2006. He is currently being held in Chaoyang District Detention Center in Beijing.
Appellant (defendant in the original trial) Zhang Weifeng, male, 3 1 year old, 1975 was born in jiaohe city, Jilin Province on July 5, Manchu, with junior high school education, unemployed, and now lives in jiaohe city, Jilin Province. He was detained on June 5438+February 19, 2005, detained in criminal detention the next day, and arrested on June 5438+ 10/8, 2006. He is currently being held in Chaoyang District Detention Center in Beijing.
Beijing Chaoyang District People's Court heard the case that Beijing Chaoyang District People's Procuratorate accused the defendants Lu, Ma Dongxing and Zhang Weifeng of intentional injury and obstruction of official duties, and on June 3, 2006, it made a criminal judgment of (2006) J.C.Chu.Zi. No.2373. After the verdict was pronounced, within the statutory time limit, the defendants in the original trial, Lu, Ma Dongxing and Zhang Weifeng, refused to accept the verdict and appealed separately. Our college has formed a collegial panel according to law. After marking the papers, we questioned the appellants (defendants in the original trial) Lu, Ma Dongxing and Zhang Weifeng, and decided not to hold a trial because the facts of the case were clear. The case has now been closed.
Beijing Chaoyang District People's Court ruled that at about 6: 00 on June 5438+February 19, 2005, the defendants Lu, Ma Dongxing, Zhang Weifeng and others were drunk at the fourth ring road of Dongfeng North Bridge in Chaoyang District of this city. Due to traffic problems, they had an argument with the driver of Beijing Bus Company 7 10 (male, 25 years old, from Henan), and Zhang Junjie's scalp was cracked. Passenger Liu Yuebiao (male, 35 years old, from Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region) stepped forward to dissuade him, and the defendants Lu, Ma Dongxing and Zhang Weifeng immediately beat Liu Yuebiao, resulting in scalp laceration, multiple soft tissue injuries and concussion, which were identified as minor injuries by criminal science and technology. When police officers Wang Jianmin (male, 42 years old, from Beijing) and Yan (male, 3 1 year old, from Beijing) of Jiuxianqiao Police Station of Chaoyang Branch received an alarm and arrived at the scene to handle the case, the defendants Lu, Ma Dongxing and Zhang Weifeng abused, pushed and beat Wang Jianmin and Yan while performing official duties, causing many soft tissue contusions to Yan.
During the trial in Chaoyang Court, after mediation, Lu, Ma Dongxing and Zhang Weifeng compensated the victim Liu Yuebiao (paid in advance by relatives) for medical expenses, lost time, cosmetic surgery fees, continuing treatment fees and other economic losses totaling RMB 24,000; Compensation for medical expenses of the victim Zhang Junjie is 2000 yuan.
The court of first instance found that the evidence of the above facts are:
1. The victim Zhang Junjie's statement and identification transcript prove that on February 19 16, 2005, when Zhang Junjie was driving the No.710 bus to Dongfeng North Bridge in Chaoyang District of this city, several men got off the minibus because they wouldn't let a minibus back up, and commanded the fat man who backed up to scold Zhang Jun. After stopping, several men got off the minibus. One of them climbed into the bus through the window and hit him on the head with a spring lock. Later, Zhang Junjie was dragged out of the car, and some people continued to punch and kick him. When he woke up, he saw several men swearing and pushing the police. After identification, it was confirmed that the defendant was a man who injured his head with a spring lock; The defendant, Ma Dongxing, was the one who directed the reversing, then scolded him and fell to the ground.
2. The statement and identification record of the victim, Liu Yuebiao, prove that at the above time and place, the bus No.710 on which Liu Yuebiao was riding had a dispute with a minibus. Five or six people got on the minibus and hit the bus driver. One of the men wearing a leather jacket hit the driver on the head with a spring lock, and the driver's head bled. Several men pulled the driver to the car. Liu Yuebiao stepped forward to dissuade him, and the other party beat Liu Yuebiao. One of the stout men grabbed Liu by the collar and pulled him to the guardrail on the roadside. The man wearing a leather jacket hurt Liu's left eye brow with a spring lock. A tall fat man grabbed Liu's collar and said, "Do you know who I am? Let you know, beat him for me. " Later, the stout man injured Liu Yuebiao's left forehead with a spring lock. After being dissuaded by passers-by, several men continued to beat the driver of bus No.710, and finally two policemen rushed forward to stop it. A few people don't listen to advice. The man wearing a leather jacket also smashed two policemen with cement blocks, slapped the policeman wearing glasses, knocked off the policeman's hat, and then tore off the policeman's uniform button and alarm number. Another fat man and a short fat man pushed and insulted another policeman and tore off his uniform buttons, epaulettes and badges. Later, the police came and arrested several men. After Liu Yuebiao's appraisal, it was confirmed that the defendant Lu was a man wearing a leather jacket, who beat and injured his left brow bone with a spring lock, and then tried to hit the police with a cement block and slapped the glasses police in the face. The defendant Ma Dongxing was a short and fat man with a forehead injury and pulled the police; Defendant Zhang Weifeng grabbed his collar and said, "Do you know who I am? Let you know, hit him for me "and then hit him, and then pull and push the fat policeman.
3. The statements of the victims, Yan and Wang Jianmin, prove that on June 65438+February 19 16, 2005, they arrived at the scene in a police car after receiving the police, and saw a stout man wrestling with a man with blood all over his face. They stepped forward to dissuade them. The stout man did not listen to dissuasion, and continued to beat each other and abused Yan and Wang Jianmin. From the side, a man in a black leather jacket was holding a cement block to hit Yan and Wang. After being stopped, the man slapped Yan, knocked off Yan's police cap, and then kicked, pulled and cursed Yan. At the same time, two men, one tall and one short, pulled and pushed Yan and Wang, and their police titles, alarm numbers and buttons were torn. When the reinforced police arrived, they arrested three men. After identification by Yan and Wang Jianmin, it was confirmed that the defendant Lu was a man wearing a black leather jacket. He wanted to beat the police with a cement block, then slapped Yan and pulled and kicked Yan. The defendant Ma Dongxing was a short and fat man who beat the victim, abused, dragged and pushed the police. Defendant Zhang Weifeng is a fat man, pulling and pushing the police.
4. Witness Kang Jianqing's testimony and identification transcript prove that he left the car with Zhang Junjie on June 5th, 2005+February 6th+September 6th. At about 0/6 o'clock that day, when the bus arrived at Dongfeng North Bridge, it was pulled over by an unlicensed minibus, and a short and chubby man was lying on the left rear wheel of their car. Several men on the bus hit Zhang Junjie when they got on the bus. One of the men wearing a leather jacket hit the head with a spring lock, and the latter two men dragged Zhang under the car to continue beating. A passenger in the car dissuaded him. The stout man pushed the passenger to the guardrail on the side of the road and beat him. Some people punched and kicked the passengers, and some people locked him up with springs. They stopped him when the police arrived. The man in the leather jacket tried to hit the policeman with a cement block. After being stopped, he slapped the policeman with glasses and pulled his uniform. The stout man and a tall man pushed and cursed another policeman and tore his uniform, then reinforced the policeman to the scene. At the same time, it proved that after the police arrived, several beating men fled with the bus. After Kang Jianqing's appraisal, it was confirmed that the defendant Lu was a man wearing a leather jacket with a spring lock, trying to beat the police with cement blocks and wearing glasses; The defendant Ma Dongxing is a short and fat man, lying under the car, swearing, pulling and shoving at the police; Defendant Zhang Weifeng is a fat man, pulling and pushing another policeman.
5. Testimony and identification transcripts of witnesses He Jun and Yan prove that at about 6: 00 on February 9, 2005, near Dongfeng North Bridge in Chaoyang District of this city, several men got off a medium-sized van, rushed to the bus No.710 where they were riding, beat the driver, and then dragged the driver under the car to continue fighting, but a passenger's persuasion was ineffective. A man in a leather jacket tried to attack a policeman with a cement block. After being stopped, he slapped a policeman with glasses and tore up the police uniform. The stout man and a fat man also pushed and pulled another policeman, and the uniforms of both policemen were torn. The last three men were arrested by the police who arrived. At the same time, it proved that after the police arrived, several men who beat people ran away, leaving only these three men, all of whom participated in beating drivers and passengers. After identification by He Jun, Yan and others, it was confirmed that the defendant Lu was a man wearing a leather jacket who wanted to beat the police with cement blocks and kick the police with glasses. The defendant Ma Dongxing is a short and fat man, slandering and shoving the police; Defendant Zhang Weifeng is a fat man who insulted and pushed the police.
6. Witness Yicao's testimony and identification record prove that at about 6: 438+06 on February 9, 2005, several men beat the driver of a 7 10 bus near Dongfeng North Bridge in Chaoyang District of this city. One of them was wearing a leather jacket with a spring lock, and a passenger was also beaten by those men when he tried to dissuade him. When the police arrived, these people abused and pushed the police. Among them, the man wearing a leather jacket smashed the police with a concrete block. After being stopped, he slapped a policeman with glasses and tore up the police uniform. The stout man and a fat man pushed another policeman, and the uniforms of both policemen were torn. The last three men were arrested by the police who arrived. After identification, it was confirmed that the defendant Lu was a man wearing a leather jacket who was beaten with a spring lock. He wanted to beat the police with a cement block and beat the police with glasses. The defendant Ma Dongxing is a short and fat man who scolds, pulls and pushes the police. Defendant Zhang Weifeng is a fat man, pulling and pushing another policeman.
7. The hospital diagnosis certificate proved the injuries of the victim, Liu Yuebiao and Yan.
8. The appraisal of the degree of human injury proves that the victim Liu Yuebiao's physical injury is minor (serious injury) and the victim Zhang Junjie's physical injury is minor.
9. 1 10 police records, photos of physical evidence, photos of victims' injuries, list of seized items, proof materials of Jiuxianqiao police station of Chaoyang Branch, criminal records of defendants Lu and Ma Dongxing, etc.
According to the above facts and evidence, the court of first instance held that the defendants Lu, Ma Dongxing and Zhang Weifeng could not handle things correctly, but they ganged up and beat others, causing one person to be slightly injured (partial) and the other slightly injured. The actions of the three defendants violated the criminal law and constituted the crime of intentional injury; Defendants Lu, Ma Dongxing and Zhang Weifeng also violently obstructed the staff of state organs from performing their duties according to law. The actions of the three defendants have constituted crimes of obstructing official duties and should be punished according to law. Defendants Lu and Ma Dongxing are recidivists and should be severely punished according to law. The deprivation of political rights and fines for defendant Lu's previous crimes should be combined. In view of the fact that the three defendants can compensate the victims for their economic losses, they will be given a lighter punishment for the crime of intentional injury. Therefore, the verdict is: 1. Defendant Lu committed the crime of intentional injury and was sentenced to two years in prison; He was sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of one year and six months and fined RMB 20,000. He was deprived of political rights for one year, six months and thirteen days for the previous crime. Decided to execute a fixed-term imprisonment of three years, deprived of political rights for one year, six months and thirteen days, and fined RMB 20,000. Second, the defendant Ma Dongxing was convicted of intentional injury and sentenced to two years in prison; He was convicted of nuisance of official duties and sentenced to one year and six months in prison, and decided to execute three years in prison; 3. Defendant Zhang Weifeng was convicted of intentional injury and sentenced to one year and six months in prison; He was convicted of nuisance of official duties, sentenced to one year in prison and decided to execute two years in prison.
Lu and Zhang Weifeng appealed that not beating the victim did not constitute intentional injury. Ma Dongxing appealed that he did not beat the victim, nor insulted or pushed the police, which did not constitute the crime of intentional injury and nuisance of official duties.
It was found through trial that the court of first instance found that Lu, Ma Dongxing and Zhang Weifeng were guilty of intentional injury and obstruction of official duties. The evidence confirming this fact has been confirmed by the court of first instance through proof and cross-examination, and it has also been confirmed by our court after examination.
Our court believes that the appellants (defendants in the original trial) Lu, Ma Dongxing and Zhang Weifeng failed to correctly handle disputes with others, and ganged up and beat others, causing one person to be slightly injured (partial) and the other person to be slightly injured, all of which constituted the crime of intentional injury; Lu, Ma Dongxing and Zhang Weifeng also violently hindered the staff of state organs from performing their duties according to law, and their actions have constituted crimes of obstructing official duties and should be punished according to law. Lu and Ma Dongxing are recidivists who committed crimes within five years after their release from prison, and should be severely punished according to law. Lu's deprivation of political rights and fines should be calculated together. Lu, Zhang Weifeng and Ma Dongxing appealed that they had not beaten the victim. After investigation, the statements and identification transcripts of the victims and Liu Yuebiao confirmed the behavior of Lu, Ma Dongxing and Zhang Weifeng in beating the victims. The testimony and appraisal records of witnesses Kang Jianqing, Yi Cao and others can also prove the intentional injury of the three appellants, and there are hospital diagnosis certificates and expert appraisal books to confirm the victim's injury. Therefore, the appeal grounds that Lu, Ma Dongxing and Zhang Weifeng did not constitute intentional injury could not be established. Ma Dongxing did not insult or push the police, which did not constitute a crime of obstructing official duties. After investigation, the testimony and identification transcripts of two policemen and several witnesses confirmed the fact that Ma Dongxing, Lu and Zhang Weifeng jointly abused, pushed and beat the policemen, so Ma Dongxing's appeal grounds could not be established and were not accepted by our court. According to the facts, nature and circumstances of the crimes committed by Lu, Ma Dongxing and Zhang Weifeng and the degree of harm to society, the judgment made by the court of first instance is correct in conviction, correct in applicable law, appropriate in sentencing and legal in trial procedure, and should be maintained. Accordingly, in accordance with the provisions of Item (1) of Article 189 of the Criminal Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), the judgment of our court is as follows:
The appeals of Lu, Ma Dongxing and Zhang Weifeng were rejected and the original judgment was upheld.
This is the final verdict.