If the woman insults the man and then acts, is it considered a mutual assault if the man fights back

If the woman insults the man and then makes a move, the man fights back, it should belong to the goods, but it depends on the strength of the woman's hands, if it is too strong, it is a legitimate defense.

In this case, if only the man did it and the woman did not do it. This does not count as a mutual assault. Although the other party has some non-cursing words, you have to stop it in time. Can't get your hands dirty.

The girl insulted the man and then moved, and the man fought back, which was considered a mutual assault. In fact, in this case, a man should not hit a woman. You turn around and run, stay away from him, he calms down, and he won't beat you and scold you. Hitting a woman is irrational.

Hello, the law stipulates that if someone does it first, and the person who is beaten calls the police, then the person who beats the person is fully responsible. If you fight back, then it becomes a mutual assault.

The woman insults the male queen and makes a move, and the man's return fire is also counted as a mutual assault, because the man can completely avoid the woman's attack.

As long as the two sides fight, it is a mutual assault, if the woman moves, the man can resist as a self-defense, but can not fight back, it is a kind of mutual assault.

It's a mutual assault. The man dodges, protect himself, it's okay not to be beaten, there is no need to fight back.

Hello, glad to be able to help you with this question. Personally, I think. If hands-on. That would be a violation of the law. If injury is caused, it constitutes the crime of intentional injury. Criminal liability is required. So you have to think twice.

The woman did it first, and then the man returned it, which should be regarded as a mutual assault between two people, but this is definitely not good.

If you fight each other, I think of course it's a red envelope, but this thing is illegal, and if you call the police, you still have to deal with it.

If the woman insults the man and then starts to do it, is it considered a mutual assault for the man to fight back? I think that if the woman insults the man, and the man fights back first, it should be justified defense.

However, it is always bad to do it at any time, and it is recommended to deal with disputes calmly.

The woman scolds the man and the two sides should be in each other's hands, it stands to reason that the man should not do it, and a good man doesn't fight with a woman.

The woman scolded me, and after insulting the man, she still did it, did the man fight back at Shuai Hu Ou? No, it was the woman who started to fight first, and the man and the man had the right to do it.

If you don't believe it's a mutual assault, you try.

If the other person is seriously injured and constitutes a minor injury, you can see if you want to be detained. Looking at the justifiable defense of Yishui in front of me, how many cases of justifiable defense have been judged to be justified in reality? In particular, there is no need for legitimate defense in fights. Both sides beat each other.

If the woman scolds and does it first, then the boy will be happy even if he knows the legitimate defense.

The woman makes the first move, and the man fights back, which is not a mutual assault, but a legitimate defense.

If the other party provokes first. It also belongs to the other party picking quarrels and provoking trouble. But if you fight back with the other person, that's for sure.

If that's the case, I think it depends on how your relationship is and what the situation was at the time.

Two people who do each other are mutual Europe, and more than three people are group Europe. If injured, both are responsible.

The woman insults the man and then makes a move, and the man fights back? If you fight back once, it doesn't count, if you keep fighting back, it's definitely a fight.

It's definitely called a fight. If he beats you, and if you beat him, he will return the favor, which is called a general and a mutual beating.

A man who does things with a woman is not right no matter how he talks about it.

The south still has to be generous, because the strength of the south is much greater than that of girls, so they can't take the initiative to fight, the so-called gentleman doesn't do it?

Just defended, hit her until she lost the ability to attack.

If the man fights back, it will be considered a mutual assault.

Legal analysis: The man beating the woman is suspected of intentional injury and should be investigated for criminal responsibility.

Legal basis: Article 43 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on Public Security Administration Punishments: Whoever assaults another person, or intentionally harms another person's body, shall be detained for not less than 5 days but not more than 10 days, and shall also be fined between 200 and 500 yuan; where the circumstances are more minor, they are to be detained for up to 5 days or fined up to 500 RMB.

In any of the circumstances listed in the following discussions, they are to be detained for between 10 and 15 days and fined between 500 and 1,000 RMB

1) Gang up to beat or injure others;

2) Assaulting or injuring persons with disabilities, pregnant women, persons under the age of 14, or persons over the age of 60;

3) Repeatedly beating or injuring others, or beating or injuring multiple people at a time.

Legal analysis: It is necessary to make a determination based on facts and evidence, and if the appraisal is a slight injury, the public security organ will punish the beater. The perpetrator bears the victim's medical expenses, lost work expenses, and other expenses.

Legal basis: "Law of the People's Republic of China on Public Security Administration Punishments" Article 43 Whoever assaults another person or intentionally harms another person's body shall be detained for not less than 5 days but not more than 10 days and shall also be fined between 200 and 500 RMB; where the circumstances are more minor, they are to be detained for up to 5 days or fined up to 500 RMB.

1) Gang up to beat or injure others;

2) Beating or injuring persons with disabilities, pregnant women, persons under the age of 14, or persons over the age of 60;

3) Repeatedly beating or injuring others, or beating or injuring multiple people at a time.

Legal analysis: If the parties are beaten back, whether it is determined that they are fighting each other or justified defense depends on the specific circumstances. If the opponent fights back in the process of being beaten, and the opponent stops after stopping, it is justified defense.

Legal basis: "Guiding Opinions on the Lawful Application of the Justified Defense System".

5. Accurately grasp the causal conditions for legitimate defense. The premise of justifiable defense is the existence of an unlawful offense. Unlawful infringement includes acts that infringe not only on the rights to life and health, but also on personal freedom, public and private property, and other rights; This includes both criminal and illegal acts.

Unlawful aggression should not be unduly confined to violence or criminal acts. Defenses may be exercised against unlawful encroachments such as unlawful restrictions on the personal liberty of others or illegal intrusion into the homes of others. Unlawful infringement includes not only unlawful infringement against oneself, but also unlawful infringement that endangers the state, public interest, or others.

Defenses may be exercised against ongoing illegal and criminal acts that impede safe driving or endanger public safety, such as pulling the steering wheel and beating the driver. Adults shall dissuade and stop unlawful violations against other minors that minors are currently committing; Where dissuasion or suppression is ineffective, defense may be exercised.

6. Accurately grasp the time conditions for legitimate defense. Justifiable defence must be directed against an ongoing wrongful offense. Where the unlawful offense has already formed a real and imminent danger, it shall be found that the unlawful offense has already begun; Where the unlawful offense is temporarily interrupted or temporarily stopped, but there is still a realistic possibility that the unlawful offender will continue to carry out the offense, it shall be found that the unlawful offense is still ongoing; In property crimes, where the unlawful offender has already obtained property, but the property can be recovered through measures such as chasing or blocking, it may be viewed that the unlawful offense is still ongoing; Where the unlawful offender has truly lost the capacity to infringe or has truly given up the violation, it shall be found that the unlawful infringement has ended.

As to whether the unlawful offense has begun or ended, a reasonable judgment shall be made in accordance with law based on the circumstances in which the defender was in the defense, and in accordance with the general understanding of the public, and the defender must not be demanded. Where defenders have a misunderstanding of whether the unlawful offense has begun or ended due to panic, nervousness, or other such factors, they shall be appropriately handled in accordance with law in accordance with the principle of unity of subjectivity and objectivity.

Summary. If the other party applies for a judicial appraisal and the appraisal results reach the consequences of minor injuries or more, you can be required to be held criminally responsible. Your actions have been convicted of intentional injury.

The husband and wife quarreled, the woman called the party to beat and insult the man first, and the woman had beaten her many times before, this time she couldn't bear to fight back, causing the sedan chair to slightly injure the woman, she opened the injury identification certificate and has called the police, and the man has no evidence to prove his innocence, what to do if he disturbs Kai.

This situation is a fight, both parties are responsible, if Duan Blind Party applies for a judicial appraisal, and the appraisal results reach the consequences of minor injuries or above, you can be asked to be held criminally responsible. Your actions have been suspected of intentionally holding at a height to injure yourself.

However, because you are a family dispute, I will generally mediate with you first, and will not directly file a criminal case for you.

Then how can I prove my innocence, the injury appraisal is not arbitrarily opened by the woman, but needs to be taken to the police station after the police station takes the woman to a special forensic appraisal agency for evaluation.

How did you get the results of the minor injuries of the woman you are talking about now?

There was no evidence that she beat me, and there was no video recording at the time, but she kept an eye on it, and she said that she went to prescribe the medical certificate.

She didn't go to the police station, and now it's been 10 days.

Oh. The diagnosis certificate is not an injury evaluation, and this does not count.

Uh-huh. What is the woman's injury like, can you describe it roughly?

Then what evidence do I need to go to the police station now, I have been insatiable in greed and balance, asking for money and a house, and the two children were also destroyed by her, and the snacks are at their mercy every day, and the woman may have a nuclear blind injury on her head, and her arm is swollen.

This is most likely a subcutaneous tissue injury, which can only constitute a minor injury and does not meet the legal standard of minor injury, so you don't have to worry too much.

The woman calls the police and goes to the police station, you just need to truthfully state the reason why the fight happened.

Then I sued for divorce, and she didn't leave what the lawyer needed to provide.

Your situation is a fight, and both parties are responsible, not yours alone.

If you want to sue for divorce, you don't need to hire a lawyer, unless you have a lot of joint property that is difficult to divide.

Okay, thank you.

Do you have a lot of common property now? Can it be clearly divided? Are there any joint debts? Is the custody assignment controversial?