The prosecutor sitting in the first place on the opposite side finally recognized Fang Yi, and said in his heart: It's this guy again, this guy is too good at spraying. Thanks to the preparation, otherwise he was really bluffed.

"The prosecutor may respond to the defender's arguments." The presiding judge said.

"In response to the defender's defense, the prosecutor made the following observations:

1. The death penalty may be applied in this case

We believe that the phrase 'causing the death of a kidnapped person' as provided for in article 239 of the old Criminal Code should include the killing of a kidnapped person. The term 'killing of a kidnapped person' should include a situation where the act of killing is committed, but no death has been caused. In other words, 'causing the death of the kidnapped person' is an aggravating circumstance, while 'killing the abducted person' is an aggravating circumstance.

In this case, the defendant Sun Dalin intentionally injured the victim during the kidnapping, causing the victim to be seriously injured, and the application of the death penalty to the defendant was in line with the legislative intent of Article 239 of the old Criminal Law.

Moreover, Amendment (9) to the Criminal Law also adheres to this line of thinking, amending the second paragraph of the crime of kidnapping to read: Whoever commits the crime in the preceding paragraph and kills the kidnapped person, or intentionally injures the kidnapped person, causing serious injury or death, shall be sentenced to life imprisonment or death.

Therefore, it is appropriate to apply the death penalty to the defendant in this case.

2. The punishment for several crimes in this case should be combined.

In this case, the defendant Sun Dalin deliberately injured the victim by particularly cruel means during the continuous state of kidnapping, causing serious injuries, and his methods were particularly cruel, and we believe that it is necessary to make a separate evaluation of this.

If the defendant's act of injury is "absorbed" into the crime of kidnapping, no matter how much money or property is extorted and how much the victim is harmed, as long as the victim does not die, the maximum sentence can only be life imprisonment. We believe that this is an imbalance in punishment and guilt. Therefore, the defendant's act of injury should be characterized as the crime of intentional injury. The defendant's conduct shall be punished concurrently for the crime of kidnapping and intentional injury. Complete. The inspector said.

"The defender may respond to the prosecutor's opinion." The presiding judge said.

The presiding judge already had a general idea of the verdict of the case in his mind, but there was no way, there were too many cases in his hands, and before the trial of this case, he just glanced at it and understood the facts of the case, as for the rest...... It's all up to the trial.

"In response to the prosecutor's defense opinions and responses, the defense counsel issued the following defense opinions:

1. The death penalty should not be applied in this case

The defender argued that the Criminal Law has the principle of treating the old with leniency, so the newly amended Criminal Law should not be applied to this case. The prosecutor's defense opinion was flawed for the following reasons:

1. If the 'killing of the kidnapped person' is understood to include not only the consequences of the killing, but also the act of killing, it will inevitably lead to the fact that as long as there is an act of killing, whether it causes minor injury, serious injury, serious disability or death, the death penalty can only be imposed without exception, which is inconsistent with the principle of proportionality of crime and punishment and violates the original intent of the legislation.

The defense argued that the legislative intent of Article 239 of the old Criminal Law was to emphasize that the result of the victim's death must be achieved.

2. When judicial interpretations and relevant laws do not make special provisions on the word 'killing', the meaning of the word 'killing' should follow the understanding of ordinary people, and should not be arbitrarily expanded or restricted. The word 'kill', as an everyday term, includes the meaning of 'kill', but the emphasis is on 'harm', that is, the result of 'death'.

3. The word 'killing' appears many times in the specific provisions of the Criminal Law, such as articles 318 and 321 of the Criminal Law, where 'killing' is excluded from 'causing serious injury or death to the person being organized or transported', and it is necessary to make a separate assessment of another crime, and the punishment for multiple crimes is combined.

However, in the crime of kidnapping, 'killing' is configured with the death penalty, so the interpretation of the crime of kidnapping must be strictly controlled. According to the provisions of the old New Law, the death penalty should not be applied in this case.

2. This case is characterized as a crime of kidnapping, and there is no 'imbalance between crime and punishment'.

If the defendant Sun Dalin's means of injury were particularly cruel and caused the victim to be seriously disabled, or if the attempted murder was particularly heinous and the consequences were particularly serious, and the crime should be sentenced to death, the defender believes that the killing or injury at this time should and needs to be evaluated separately, and the defendant constitutes the crime of kidnapping and intentional injury (or intentional homicide), and the punishment for the multiple crimes is to be combined.

In the case of the above-mentioned circumstances, although the defendant cannot be sentenced to death under the crime of kidnapping, the court may sentence the defendant to death in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Criminal Code on the crimes of intentional injury and intentional homicide, so there is no imbalance between the crime and the sentence.

However, in this case, the defendant's conduct did not have the above-mentioned circumstances, and sentencing according to the crime of kidnapping would not lead to an imbalance in the crime and punishment. ”

……

“…… The collegial panel has deliberated and formed a verdict in this case. In response to the opinions of the prosecution and defense, combined with the focus of the dispute in this case, and based on the facts and evidence of this case, this court makes the following comments:

In accordance with the provisions of article 239 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, this court held that the defendant Sun Dalin committed the crime of kidnapping, was sentenced to death, and deprived of political rights for life. The presiding judge pronounced the verdict.

After hearing the verdict, Sun Dalin sat down in the defendant's seat, as the saying goes, 'It's better to die than to live', although he loves to drill the horns of the bull, it doesn't mean that he is also so persistent on the issue of death, and now the hope in his heart is gone.

Sun Dalin was not satisfied and said in court that he would appeal. Fang Yi also felt that the death penalty in this case was too far-fetched and inconsistent with the law, and after returning to the law firm, he began to prepare for the appeal in the afternoon of the same day.

A few days later, the criminal verdict came down, and after Fang Yi drafted the appeal, he met with Sun Dalin again to confirm his willingness to appeal, Sun Dalin decisively signed the appeal, and after leaving the detention center, Fang Yi submitted the appeal to the Intermediate People's Court.

Soon after, the second trial of Luo Daying's robbery case was held in the Provincial High Court.

Fang Yi made a defense of the lesser crime, because there was no dispute between the prosecution and defense and the appellant about the facts of the case, and there was only a dispute about the sentencing, so the trial of the case was very fast.

Fang Yi still adhered to the defense opinion of the first-instance trial that the crime was minor, and the procurator insisted that the first-instance judgment and sentencing were appropriate. After the trial, the presiding judge announced the verdict in court.

After trial, the Provincial High Court held that the court of first instance found that the facts of the crime of robbing the appellant Luo Daying of RMB 500,000 from bank depositors with an axe were clear and the evidence was credible and sufficient, and confirmed it in accordance with law.

Appellant Law Tat-ying's conduct constituted the crime of robbery. The original conviction was accurate, the trial procedures were lawful, and given that the appellant Luo Daying did not cause any personal injury to the victim during the crime, and did not resist with arms when he was arrested, the case has not yet caused serious consequences, and the original sentence was too heavy according to the principle of proportionality of crime and punishment.

Appellant Luo Daying and his defender's grounds of appeal and defense opinions of 'excessive sentencing' are sustained, and this court adopts them. In accordance with the provisions of Article 189 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, Article 267 (2), Article 263 (3) and (4) and Article 57 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, and Article 6 of the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Law in the Trial of Robbery Cases", the judgment is as follows:

1. The portion of the Intermediate People's Court's criminal judgment that convicted the defendant Luo Daying is upheld, and the sentencing portion is revoked.

2. The appellant (defendant in the original trial) Luo Daying committed robbery and was sentenced to life imprisonment, deprivation of political rights for life, and confiscation of all personal property.

(End of chapter)