Chapter 545 Being cheated!

Author: Snow Yinghong Plum

Chapter 545 Being cheated!

The defendant Zhao Sixi and his defense lawyer expressed their approval of the crime and the charges, and stated that the defendant Zhao Sixi had a good attitude of pleading guilty after being arrested, and suggested that the court give a lighter punishment.

The defendant Wu Meifeng insisted that she had no intention of kidnapping, and that she was deceived by Zhao Sixi to help.

"The defense lawyer of the defendant Wu Meifeng, express his defense opinion." said the presiding judge.

"Previous Judge, Judge: The defense lawyer believes that although the defendant Wu Meifeng and the defendant Zhao Sixi jointly committed the act of kidnapping the victim Chen Yue, the defendant Wu Meifeng and Zhao Sixi did not constitute a joint crime, and the reasons are as follows:

Article 25, Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Law clearly stipulates that joint crime refers to the intentional crime committed by more than two persons. Three conditions must be met for the establishment of a joint crime:

The first condition is that the criminal subject must be more than two people who have reached the age of criminal responsibility and have the ability to criminally liability.

The second condition is that the criminal subject has a common criminal intention.

The third condition is that the criminal subject has common criminal acts.

In this case, the two defendants both reached the age of criminal responsibility and had the ability to criminally liability, and both met the first condition mentioned above.

The second condition is that joint criminal intention is the subjective requirement for the joint crime. Several people who lack joint criminal intention commit the same crime on the same object at the same time are only committed at the same time, rather than a joint crime.

In a joint crime, when two people commit a criminal act of mutual support and helping the same object at the same time, if the intentional content of the crime of both parties is different and the common intention is not formed, it cannot constitute a joint crime.

In this case, the defendant Zhao Sixi lied to the defendant Wu Meifeng that someone owed him a debt and refused to repay it. He advised Wu Meifeng to bring his daughter and force him to repay the debt.

Wu Meifeng mistakenly believed that Zhao Sixi kidnapped the victim Chen Yue to claim debts, but did not know that Zhao Sixi's real purpose was to extort money and property.

Although Wu Meifeng and Zhao Sixi committed the crime of kidnapping the victim Chen Yue (meeting the third condition for a joint crime), since he subjectively believed that the kidnapping Chen Yue was to claim debt from his father, the content of his intentional crime was with the defendant.

Zhao Sixi is completely different. The two defendants do not have a common criminal intention, so the two do not constitute a joint kidnapping crime and can only be convicted and sentenced separately according to the crimes they constitute.

In this case, the defendant Wu Meifeng should constitute the crime of illegal detention. The defense lawyer suggested that the defendant Wu Meifeng be subject to probation. It was completed." Fang Yi said.

"The prosecutor can respond to the defense counsel's defense opinion." said the presiding judge.

“Our view on the defense attorney’s defense is as follows:

In this case, although the defendant Zhao Sixi intentionally deceived the defendant Wu Meifeng, the debt Zhao Sixi mentioned was not a real debt, but a fictitious debt.

Whether it is the provisions of Article 238, Paragraph 3 of the Criminal Law or the provisions on illegal debts in the judicial interpretation of the Supreme Court, real debts are required. The debts in this case are fictional, and Wu Meifeng uses fictional

The debt is for criminal purposes and does not comply with the provisions of the appeal law. Therefore, we believe that the defendant Wu Meifeng's behavior constitutes the crime of kidnapping and is an accomplice. "The prosecutor said.

"The defense lawyer can respond to the prosecutor's opinion." said the presiding judge.

“In response to the prosecutor’s defense opinions and responses, the defense lawyer has made the following defense opinions:

Although there is actually no legal creditor-debtor relationship between the defendant Zhao Sixi and the victim's father Chen Shouyi in this case, there is no creditor-debtor relationship between usury, gambling debt, etc. that is not protected by law.

However, Wu Meifeng did not know about it because she was deceived, and helped Zhao Sixi perform a kidnapping for the purpose of claiming debt. After committing the crime, Zhao Sixi did not tell Wu Meifeng his real purpose. Wu Meifeng subjectively had the intention of illegal detention and no intention of kidnapping.

Therefore, according to Article 238, Paragraph 1 and 3 of the Criminal Law, Wu Meifeng's behavior is in line with the characteristics of the crime of illegal detention of debt collection. Wu Meifeng should constitute the crime of illegal detention. It is completed." Fang Yi said.

...

After the trial, the presiding judge made a verdict in court.

The collegial panel believes that the defendant Zhao Sixi kidnapped others for the purpose of extorting property, and after committing the kidnapping, he called to extort property. His behavior constituted the crime of kidnapping.

The defendant Wu Meifeng believed in the lie that the defendant Zhao Sixi seized hostages for debt collection. Under this knowledge, he assisted Zhao Sixi in illegal detention of children. His behavior constituted the crime of illegal detention.

The facts of the public prosecution agency accused Zhao Sixi of kidnapping are clear, the evidence is true and sufficient, and the charges are correct, and they are supported; he accused Wu Meifeng of kidnapping, because Wu Meifeng subjectively did not have the intention and purpose of kidnapping and extortion of property, so the charges were not

Accurate and should be corrected.

Zhao Sixi's defense lawyer suggested that Zhao Sixi's attitude of admitting guilt after being arrested, and could be given a lighter punishment. After investigation, although Zhao Sixi was able to truthfully confess his crime after being arrested, the crime was not enough to be given a lighter punishment based on his means of crime, the consequences and social impact were not enough to be given a lighter punishment.

.

The defendant Wu Meifeng argued that she did not intentionally kidnap and her defense lawyer suggested that Wu Meifeng's behavior was carried out under the condition of being deceived, with little subjective malice, and had a good attitude of admitting guilt after being arrested, and showed remorse, and could be given a lighter punishment.

After investigation, Wu Meifeng committed the crime under the intentional domination of Zhao Sixi's lie that he was detaining hostages and demanding debts. After committing the crime, Zhao Sixi did not tell Wu Meifeng his true purpose. Wu Meifeng subjectively had the intention of illegal detention and no intention of kidnapping.

His defense and defense opinions are established and adopted.

Finally, the Intermediate Court ruled: First, the defendant Zhao Sixi was sentenced to life imprisonment, deprived of political rights for life, and confiscated property. Second, the defendant Wu Meifeng was sentenced to three years in prison for illegal detention.

After the verdict was announced, Zhao Sixi's body became weak and he fell into a state of paralysis. The bailiffs on both sides were quick-eyed and immediately stretched out their arms to raise him up.

Wu Meifeng's expectation was to be sentenced to ten years in prison, and she was finally sentenced to three years, which was offset by the time she was detained before. The time she really needed to serve her sentence was about two years and ten months. After the dust settled, she became much more brisk.

.

Because after the incident and during the trial, Zhao Sixi's family had been negotiating compensation with the victim's family, and the Zhao family hoped that the Chen family could issue a letter of understanding. However, the Chen family hated Zhao Sixi and felt that the Zhao family paid too little money and refused to forgive.

Book, the two families have been talking about exchanging money for letters of understanding, so the Chen family did not file a criminal and civil lawsuit.

After the verdict was announced, Zhao Sixi was sentenced to life imprisonment. The Zhao family lost the intention to compensate, so they should do whatever they want. The Chen family felt that they had been cheated, so they filed a civil lawsuit.

Finally, the court ruled that Zhao Sixi and Wu Meifeng compensated the Chen family for economic losses of 3892 yuan (of which the victim Chen Yue had 3500 yuan in medical expenses, nursing expenses, and loss of work costs of 392 yuan).
Chapter completed!