High Score Re Line The issue of legitimate defense, the boundary of legitimate defense and counterat

Of course, it's just self-defense.

Justifiable defense is generally directed against the personal rights of the wrongdoer, but it does not exclude the right to property rights, such as attacks on animals. A lets the dog bite B, and the person who commits the unlawful infringement is A, and B should of course exercise legitimate defense against the unlawful infringer A, and at the same time, it can also defend against A's property rights, that is, A's dog, and the legal effect is the same.

It's justified defense!

In this case, the dog is a tool for unlawful assault on person B! (Like a stick, it can't be taken accountable, the responsibility is borne by people, so you can defend against people!) ）

Criminal Law Cases.

I think it's the animals that cause the damage.

Don't know, right?

No, if you have to be held responsible, B's responsibility is greater, because B is beating people, not attacking B's dog, this is more complicated in short, if the probability of B winning the lawsuit is very low, the key is to see B's intention to attack A, is to stop A or because A lets the dog bite B, B is provoked and attacks A.

If it is the question of the exam, I don't know, it should still not be justified defense, because the purpose of B's action is not clear, whether it is to stop A's infringement on B, or to retaliate against A, the key point is here.

No, because it was the dog that attacked A, not B, so it wasn't justified defense.

Justifiable self-defense is an incident of self-defense that occurs when you are threatened with your life or injury. So if his dog causes you harm and threatens to hit him, whether he can eliminate his threat is the argument in this case. However, if you punch too fast and cause his dog to die, he has no way to sue you, and if both the dog and him are injured, you are likely to be judged to have defended too aggressively if you are not injured.

It is recommended to hit his dog first when you encounter this problem in the future, because you can bypass the dog and hit him to prove that you should have no problem hitting the dog directly, and after maiming the dog, then he will rush over and hit you, and then hit him again so that you can talk.

No, this case should be handled by **.

Justifiable defense is a defensive act taken to stop the unlawful infringement and cause certain damage to the wrongdoer in order to protect the state, public interests, property and other rights from ongoing unlawful infringement. Excessive defense, on the other hand, refers to the act of stopping an unlawful infringement in order to protect the state, the public interest, the person, property, and other rights of oneself or others from an ongoing unlawful infringement, but causing significant damage to the unlawful infringer beyond the necessary limit. If the defense is excessive, he shall bear criminal responsibility.

The boundary between justifiable defense and excessive defense is whether the retaliation against the wrongdoer clearly exceeds the necessary limit and causes significant harm. Legal basis:

Article 20 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China: In order to protect the state, the public interest, the person, property and other rights of oneself or others from ongoing unlawful infringement; and where an act taken to stop an unlawful infringement causes harm to the unlawful infringer, it is justified defense and does not bear criminal responsibility. Where legitimate defense clearly exceeds the necessary limit and causes major harm, criminal responsibility shall be borne, but punishment shall be commuted or waived. Anyone who is engaged in a crime, murder, robbery, forcible rape, kidnapping, or other violent crimes that seriously endanger personal safety, and takes defensive actions to infect and infiltrate, causing an unlawful offense, is not considered to be in excessive defense and does not bear criminal responsibility.

Even if it is justified defense, robbery is unlimited defense, and it will not be overly defended if you are killed.

This is an excessive defense and should be investigated for criminal responsibility.

How should you understand this by letting the dog bite someone? Please elaborate.

But the victim is not justified in self-defense. Justifiable defense refers to defensive measures taken to protect security and interests. It's okay to injure or scare the dog away, there's no need to attack the dog keeper.