"The Bulletin bet365 withdrawal Supreme People's Court" issued the 5th issue of 2020 as a guiding case "Case bet365 withdrawal People's Procuratorate of Shapingba District, Chongqing v. Li Xuchen for Endangering Public Safety by Dangerous Methods"，The basic case facts are: around 18:00 on May 18, 2017，Li Xuchen drank with friends at 21-5, No. 67, Shengshi Nianhua Community, Madaozi, Shapingba District, Chongqing，Throwing a beer bottle and a glass downstairs from the balcony，The glass hit Ye (the victim) who was standing on the playground downstairs.，Male，13 years old) head，causing severe brain damage。Authenticated，The victim Ye’s injury was serious。August 26 bet365 withdrawal same year，The defendant Li Xuchen was captured by the public security organs。The public prosecution agency initiated a public prosecution for intentional injury，It is recommended that he be sentenced to three to five years in prison。

The core focus of this case is very clear: the perpetrator knew that the downstairs was a crowded school playground，How to characterize the behavior of deliberately throwing objects continuously from high altitude。There are two views in practice: first，Consisting bet365 withdrawal intentional injury；Second，Consisting bet365 withdrawal endangering public safety by dangerous means。The People's Court of Shapingba District, Chongqing found that Li Xuchen committed bet365 withdrawal endangering public safety by dangerous means，Sentenced to ten years in prison。Defendant Li Xuchen refused to accept the first instance verdict，Appeal to Chongqing No. 1 Intermediate People’s Court。May 4, 2018，Chongqing First Intermediate People’s Court ruled to reject the appeal，The original verdict is upheld。

"Based on facts，Using the law as the criterion” is the basic principle of criminal judgment。The composition of bet365 withdrawal naturally serves as a link between what should be and what is、The bridge between facts and norms。Under judicial review，The application of criminal law often revolves around the composition of the bet365 withdrawal，Compare case facts with normative facts，Then generate individual case judgment results。At the normative level，The composition of bet365 withdrawal guides the selection of norms in individual case adjudication，Guide the referee to follow the subject、Object、Subjective、Research and judge based on four objective elements，And based on this distinction between bet365 withdrawal and non-bet365 withdrawal、This sin and that sin；On a factual level，Element expressions and applicable models as specifications，The bet365 withdrawal constitutes something other than a normative "god"，Because of the requirements、The elements are clarified and have a "shape" that the norm does not have。The composition of bet365 withdrawal has a three-dimensional structure，That is, the bet365 withdrawal is constituted as a legal norm、Theoretical model、Complex of referee modes，It gives referees different selection criteria、Judgment method、Applicable templates and referee ideas，Encourage different referees to adhere to the refereeing thinking of "consistency"，Complete the effective interaction between individual case judgment specifications and judgment facts。

　　bet365 withdrawal Norms

The composition of a crime is the combination of elements for establishing a crime stipulated in the criminal law，It is a conceptual expression about which types of life facts constitute crimes，Instruct referees to find corresponding life facts based on abstract requirements and elements，Compare and organize。According to Article 234 of the Criminal Law、Looking at Article 115，bet365 withdrawal intentional injury and bet365 withdrawal endangering public safety by dangerous methods both require intentionality in the subjective aspect，But there are differences in the object of the two crimes: the object violated by bet365 withdrawal intentional injury is the right to physical health of others，Focus on the infringement of individual rights and interests by regulatory behaviors；The object of bet365 withdrawal endangering public security by dangerous means is social public security，Focus on the infringement of regulatory behaviors on public interests。Therefore，From the perspective of the specification content itself，The core essence of distinguishing the two crimes lies in the correct definition of "specific" and "unspecific"、The scope of “minority” and “majority”，And it is worth noting，Whether it constitutes a “specific” “majority”，The number of victims in a case should not be simply used as a single criterion。Just like this case，Although there is only one victim，However, the legal interest infringement caused by the defendant may cover "unspecified" and "majority"，Should be deemed to have violated “public safety” in legal norms，Consisting bet365 withdrawal endangering public safety by dangerous means。

The composition of crimes at the level of legal norms provides guidance for judicial decisions，But it also has limitations。Because words are rheological，Different types of criminal law norms have different vocabulary features，The corresponding factual characteristics are also different。Classification according to the expression of criminal law，Criminal law norms can be divided into expressions of concepts - bet365 withdrawal composition，And specific expressions-criminal law provisions，At the same time, criminal law provisions can be divided into general provisions of criminal law and specific provisions of criminal law，Different content expressions mean different characteristics and construction methods of facts。However，Law is a subjective product of human beings，Limited by the limitations of subjective knowledge and the inherent stability of norms，When faced with complicated facts，The concept of normative terms has ambiguity flowing from "central semantics" to the periphery，Individual case facts cannot be smoothly or uncontroversially covered under normative words，At this time, legal regulations appear to be "cautious"，Criminal law is no exception。

　bet365 withdrawal model

The composition of crime is a theoretical analysis mold about criminal law norms，It systematically organizes the facts，Instrumental significance。Combined with the behavior of the defendant in this case，The following analysis can be made: on the one hand，From an objective perspective，Li Xuchen took empty beer bottles one after another from a 50-meter-high building、Throwing the glass into the school playground，The consequences are for the “unspecified majority”，rather than “a specific person”，Although it caused one victim to be injured，But the harmful consequences of the behavior include but are not limited to this result，There is an objective possibility of causing more serious damage。Therefore，The dangers that may be caused by the defendant’s behavior and the danger to society are consistent with the “arson” listed in the criminal law、Die Shui、Explosion、Dangerous methods such as “dropping dangerous substances” are typical examples and the degree is quite high，Belongs to concrete facts embedded in the typical theoretical model of "bet365 withdrawal endangering public safety by dangerous methods"。On the other hand，From a subjective level，Li Xuchen is fully recognized、Judgment、Capable adults，Subjectively knowing that throwing an object from a high-rise building on the 21st floor is extremely dangerous，And when I threw the beer bottle, I saw the school playground downstairs，There are students exercising。But the defendant vented his emotions，Throwing the glass down with reckless abandon，Severe harmful consequences causing serious injury to the victim，That is, he knew that the dangerous method he implemented would endanger public safety，But let the harmful consequences happen，Subjectively, it should be considered intentional，Rather than a fault of negligence or overconfidence。

It’s worth noting，In practice，Comparison of facts under theoretical models、The construction is closely related to the setting up bet365 withdrawal litigation system。For example，The theory bet365 withdrawal Anglo-American legal system strictly distinguishes legal issues and factual issues in the judicial trial process，Judges are responsible for handling legal issues，The factual issues are left to the jury，That is, a jury composed of ordinary people is responsible for determining the facts。The premise is that the Anglo-American legal system fully realizes that it is more difficult to determine facts than apply law，Leave difficult issues to the jury，Not only can it reduce the risk of judges making mistakes in determining facts，It has also been widely recognized by the parties and the public，That’s why it’s called the “temptation bet365 withdrawal black box”。Zaru，The plea bargaining system in the United States、Germany’s consultation system and other consensual litigation systems have a certain degree of utilitarianism，While it improves judicial efficiency, it is bound to have an impact on the authenticity of fact construction，Resulting in the deviation between legal reality and objective reality。

　　bet365 withdrawal Mode

The composition of bet365 withdrawal leads the referee’s thinking mode and narrative expression of fact construction，Provides both external and internal foundations for the generation of referee facts。The criminal adjudication process is a double helix construction model，It is reflected in the construction process of referee norms，Also characterized as the construction process of referee facts，In the process of constructing facts，The referee’s subjective emotions are never far away。According to Article 115 of the Criminal Law，"Set fire、Die Shui、Explosion and release of poison、Radioactivity、Infectious disease pathogens and other substances or other dangerous methods causing serious injury、Death or causing heavy losses to public or private property，Imprisonment of more than ten years、Life imprisonment or death penalty"。In this case，Based on Li Xuchen’s criminal plot、Exhibition of repentance，In the end, the court comprehensively considered its harmfulness to society and the possibility of re-offending，When the victim is seriously injured，The minimum sentence within the range of punishment was applied to Li Xuchen，Reflects the punitive and educational functions of the law，The judge’s “personalized” judgment thinking is also incorporated into individual cases，Let the law not just stay in words，Make individual case referees vivid and warm。

bet365 withdrawal composition as a conceptual form，Exists in criminal adjudication in different forms of representation。The bet365 withdrawal composition as a criminal judgment model is more characterized by the judgment habit: with the judgment thinking as the inner part、A two-layer model with legal narrative as the external aspect。Referees need to use judicial thinking to apply legal norms and theoretical models to the specific case adjudication process，Legal norms and theoretical models based on bet365 withdrawal composition，Apply evidence rules to screen evidence involved in the case，And "restore" the facts of the case，The final judgment document is formed。At the same time，Legal narrative as its external representation，Throughout the entire litigation process。In an internalized and invisible way，Sometimes it even appears in the refereeing process in a way that even the narrative subject is not aware of，Influences the construction of refereeing facts，Also carries the legality and rationality of the judgment。

　　(This article is a phased result of the Tianjin Academy of Social Sciences' 2017 key project "Aesthetics or bet365 withdrawal - Research on Competitive Sports Violence from a Criminology Perspective" (17YZD-07)

(Author’s unit: Institute of bet365 withdrawal, Tianjin Academy of Social Sciences)