At the end of February, Shan Guangquan's case was opened.

In the fifth courtroom of the Intermediate Court, there were only Wu Caiying and a young man in the auditorium, and Fang Yi speculated that the young man was her son.

Two female prosecutors sat on the prosecutor's bench. Sitting on it sat three male judges with faces as heavy as water.

“…… When he returned to his orchard, he saw the victim Yan Jianshun in front of his house and mistakenly thought that he was an illegal aggressor, and when he saw Yan Jianshun walking towards him, he suspected that he was going to attack him, so he stabbed the victim to death with a dagger in panic and fear.

Defendant Shan Guangquan's conduct violated article 234 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, the facts of the crime are clear, the evidence is credible and sufficient, and criminal responsibility shall be pursued for the crime of intentional injury. In accordance with the provisions of article 176 of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, a public prosecution is initiated, and a sentence is requested in accordance with law.

Presiding Judge, the indictment has been read. The prosecutor put down the indictment and looked at the three judges sitting on it.

"Defendant Shan Guangquan, did you hear clearly the indictment read out by the prosecutor just now? What crime are you accused? Do you dispute the facts of the crime charged against you in the indictment? After the presiding judge finished asking, he looked at Shan Guangquan, who was sitting in the defendant's dock with a worried face.

"I heard it clearly, accusing me of intentional wounding. I have no objection to the facts, I admit that I killed Yan Jianshun, but I didn't mean to kill him, I recognized the wrong person. I thought he was the one who wanted to break into my house before, I really didn't mean to kill him......" Shan Guangquan's face was full of remorse, and he looked at the presiding judge pitifully, hoping that he could raise his noble hand and sentence himself for a few years.

Next, the prosecutor questioned the defendant on the facts of the case. Shan Guangquan confessed to the facts of the crime. Subsequently, with the permission of the presiding judge, Fang Yi also questioned the defendant.

This was followed by more than an hour of cross-examination in court.

……

"The facts of this case have been investigated, the court investigation has been completed, and the court arguments are now begining. Court debates revolve around disputed facts that have not been certified by the court and how the law should be applied based on the facts.

The prosecutor will speak first. After speaking, the presiding judge looked at the defense bench.

"Presiding Judge and Judge: ...... The prosecutor believes that in this case, the defendant Shan Guangquan wrongly identified the victim Yan Jianshun as the aggressor, and based on his misunderstanding of the illegal infringement, he used a dagger to stab the victim in the chest, which ultimately caused the serious consequences of the death of others.

Although the defendant in this case, Shan Guangquan, did not have the intent to kill, but he had the intention to injure others, and his conduct constituted the crime of intentional injury. It is recommended that the defendant be sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment. Complete. The procurator's cold speech pierced Wu Caiying's heart in the audience.

At this time, Wu Caiying clenched the fence in front of her with her hands in shock, her heart almost popped out, and tears rolled in her eyes. The young man beside her bit his lips and frowned.

Subsequently, the defendant defended himself, and Shan Guangquan tried his best to defend himself, but he was short of words, and he talked back and forth on wheels, and was finally stopped by the presiding judge.

"The defendant's defender gives his defense opinion." The presiding judge looked at the defense bench.

"Presiding Judge and Adjudicator: The defender believes that in this case, defendant Shan Guangquan's conduct is a crime of negligence, which should not be treated as an intentional crime, and should constitute the crime of negligence causing death, for the following reasons:

1. The defendant in this case, Shan Guangquan, is hypothetical defense.

In this case, the defendant Shan Guangquan's orchard was outside the village, the geographical location was relatively remote, and on the night of the incident, someone did want to illegally invade his residence.

When the defendant Shan Guangquan went out to ask for help and returned, he saw the victim Yan Jianshun standing in front of the house in his orchard. Based on the horror caused to him by the previous illegal invasion of the house (antecedents), coupled with the fact that it was cloudy and dark on the night of the crime, the visibility was not high, and it was impossible to identify the person, the defendant Shan Guangquan mistakenly believed that the victim was the unlawful aggressor.

Seeing the victim approaching him, the defendant suspected that the other party was going to attack him, so he carried out an act of 'self-defense' and stabbed the other party in the chest with a dagger. There is a plausible aspect to the defendant's 'hypothesis'.

The defendant's act of 'self-defense' in panic and fear fully conforms to the characteristics of imaginary defense, and therefore, the defense believes that the defendant's act should be recognized as an act of imaginary defense.

2. The defendant's act of imaginary self-defense is a crime of negligence.

In this case, the defendant Shan Guangquan's conduct was entirely based on the erroneous understanding of 'imaginary defense', and his original intention was to protect the personal safety and property rights and interests of himself and his family.

Therefore, there is no subjective problem that the defendant knew that his conduct would cause harm to society, and the defendant Shan Guangquan subjectively had neither direct intent nor indirect intent.

Defendant Shan Guangquan's act of 'imaginary defense' caused the innocent death of others, although objectively there is a certain degree of harm to society, does not establish the crime of intentional homicide or injury, but only establishes the crime of negligence causing death because he should have foreseen that his conduct might have harmful consequences to society, but failed to foresee such a result because of negligence.

In summary, the defender believes that the defendant has committed the crime of negligence causing death, and in view of the fact that the defendant truthfully confessed after being brought into the case, actively compensated the victim's family, and that he did show remorse, he is recommended to be sentenced to three years imprisonment. Complete. After Fang Yi finished his defense opinions, he looked at the presiding judge.

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

"With regard to the defender's defense, the prosecutor believes that at the time of the crime, the defendant Shan Guangquan took the initiative to use a dagger to stab the victim, resulting in his death, which shows that the defendant used the dagger based on his intentional psychology at the time of the crime, and his purpose was to stab the victim. Therefore, the defendant's act was intentional and should be convicted of intentional injury. Complete. The prosecutor retorted.

"The defender can respond to the prosecutor's comments." The presiding judge stopped his pen and looked at the defense bench.

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

The defender believes that the theory of "intentional" in criminal law and the theory of "intentional" in psychological theory should not be equated or confused.

According to article 14 of the Criminal Law, an intentional crime means that the perpetrator clearly knows that his or her conduct will have a result harmful to society, and hopes or allows such a result to occur.

Hypothetical defence occurs on the basis of the perpetrator's erroneous perception that his or her actions are not harmful to society.

Although the perpetrator of hypothetical defense has psychological intent, this intention is based on an erroneous perception of objective facts (whether there is an unlawful infringement).

In this case, the defendant believed that he was exercising legitimate defense against the unlawful infringement, but not only did he not realize that his actions would have consequences harmful to society, but also believed that his actions were lawful and justifiable.

The premise of 'intent' in criminal offenses is that the perpetrator knows that his or her actions will have consequences harmful to society.

To sum up, the defender argues that the 'intentionality' in the hypothetical defense only has psychological significance, not criminal intent in criminal law.

In this case, the defendant carried out hypothetical defense, which was subjectively to protect the personal safety and property rights and interests of himself and his family, and the victim's death was caused by the defendant's misunderstanding. The defendant did not subjectively have the intent to commit the crime, so it is impossible for the defendant to commit an intentional crime in the hypothetical defense, and it should be a crime of negligence. Complete. In terms of legal theory, Fang Yi is still very confident.

(End of chapter)