What is the difference between a crime of negligence, an indirect intentional crime, and an intentio

Crimes of negligence, indirect intentional crimes, and intentional crimes are the psychological forms of the subjective elements of one of the four constituent elements of a crime, specifically the psychological attitude of the perpetrator towards his or her own behavior that endangers society and the results of its endangerment to society.

Paragraph 2 of Article 15 of the Criminal Law stipulates that only those who commit crimes of negligence shall be criminally liable if the law provides for them, so the crimes of negligence provided for in the sub-provisions all require serious harmful results.

The starting point for negligent crimes is lower than for intentional crimes.

Intentional offense is knowing that the criminal act will bring about criminal consequences or allowing the consequences to occur Indirect intentional offense is a kind of knowingly and indulgently allowing the criminal act to occur.

"Crime of negligence" refers to acts committed under the psychological control of negligence that have constituted a crime in accordance with the provisions of the Criminal Law. Criminal negligence refers to the mental attitude that the perpetrator should have foreseen that his or her conduct might have consequences that would harm society, but did not foresee it because of negligence, or had foreseen it but was gullible enough to avoid it. There are two types of criminal negligence, negligent negligence and overconfident negligence.

The perpetrator should have been able to correctly understand the connection between a certain act and the result of harm to society, and then correctly choose his own behavior to avoid the occurrence of the result of harm to society, but under the control of his own free will, he adopted an extremely irresponsible attitude towards the interests of the state, society and the people, and thus caused the result of harm to society with his own behavior.

First, it is the psychological attitude of knowing that their behavior may have harmful consequences to society, and allowing such results to occur; Second, they know that their behavior may have some kind of harmful result to society, and let such a result occur; Third, they know that their behavior may cause some kind of result that is harmful to society, and deliberately allows such a result to occur. Therefore, indirect intent refers to the mental attitude of the perpetrator who is aware that his or her conduct may have a result harmful to society, and allows such a result to occur. In other words, foreseeing the possibility of a harmful outcome and allowing it to occur is indirect intent.

Article 14 of the Criminal Law stipulates: "A person who clearly knows that his or her conduct will have a result harmful to society, and hopes or allows such a result to occur, thus constituting a crime, is guilty of an intentional crime." That is, the psychological attitude expressed by the perpetrator, allowing the harmful results of the act to occur is an indirect intentional crime.

Intentional crime is committed when one clearly knows that one's conduct will have a result that is harmful to society, but then hopes or allows such a result to occur, thus constituting a crime. shall be held criminally responsible.

Those who commit intentional crimes shall bear criminal responsibility.

Intentional crime refers to a crime committed by the perpetrator in a state of intentional mental deception, which is a subjective state of mind in the constitutive elements of the crime. The crime of negligence refers to a person who should have foreseen that one's own conduct might have a result that would be harmful to society, but failed to foresee it because of negligence, or had foreseen it and believed that it could have been avoided, so that such a result occurred.

1. What are the circumstances of negligence in the crime of medical malpractice?

The subjective aspect of the crime of medical malpractice is negligence. The so-called negligence refers to the mental attitude that should foresee that one's actions may have a result that is harmful to society, because of negligence and did not foresee it, or because it had been foreseen and credulously believed that it could be avoided, so that such a result would occur.

Negligent negligence refers to the mental attitude of medical personnel who should have foreseen that their violation of rules and regulations or routine diagnosis and treatment and nursing practices might cause the death of the patient or seriously damage the patient's physical health, but did not foresee it due to negligence, so that such a result occurred.

Overconfident negligence refers to the state of mind in which a medical staff has foreseen that their violation of rules and regulations or routine medical care may lead to the death of the patient or serious damage to the patient's physical health, but the credulity can be avoided, resulting in such a result.

2. What does it mean to commit a crime of negligence?

A crime of negligence is a crime committed negligently. Criminal negligence, on the other hand, refers to the mental attitude that one should foresee that one's actions may have a result that is harmful to society, and because of negligence, one did not foresee it, or had foreseen it and believed that it could be avoided, so that such a result would occur.

Crimes of negligence include negligent negligence and overconfident negligence. Only those who commit crimes of negligence shall be criminally liable if the law provides for them. In other words, a crime of negligence can only constitute a crime if the act has caused harmful results to society.

If there are no serious consequences, there is no crime of negligence.

Article 14 of the Criminal Code.

Intentional crimes are committed when one clearly knows that one's conduct will have a result that is harmful to society, and hopes or allows such a result to occur, thus constituting a crime.

Those who commit intentional crimes shall bear criminal responsibility.

Article 15. It is a crime of negligence to foresee that one's actions may have consequences that are harmful to society, but because of negligence and failure to foresee them, or those who have foreseen them and believe that they can avoid them, so that such a result occurs. Zi Senxun.

Only those who commit crimes of negligence shall be criminally liable if the law provides for them.

Legal Analysis: The differences between the two: First, the subjective psychological state of the actor is different

Indirect intentional permissiveness of the occurrence of harmful results, negligence subjectively does not want harmful results to occur; Second, the sentencing is different. Criminal responsibility shall be borne for indirect intentional crimes, and criminal responsibility shall be borne only for crimes of negligence as provided for by law.

Legal basis: Article 14 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China? Intentionally committing a crime is a crime if one clearly knows that one's conduct will have a result that is harmful to society, and hopes or allows such a result to occur, and thus commits a crime. Those who commit intentional crimes shall bear criminal responsibility.

Article 15. It is a crime of negligence to foresee that one's actions may have consequences that are harmful to society, and those who fail to foresee them because of negligence, or who have foreseen them and believe that they can avoid them, so that such a result of such a delay in the formation of such a state of failure to do so is a crime of negligence. For crimes of negligence, only those who are subject to criminal liability if the law stipulates that they are dismissed.

1. The definitions are different.

Indirect intent is a type of crime, that is, the state of mind that knows that one's actions may have a result that is harmful to society, and allows such a result to occur. A crime of negligence, on the other hand, is a crime in which the perpetrator foresaw that his or her conduct might have a result harmful to society, and was credulous enough to avoid it, but in fact failed to avoid it, resulting in such a result.

2. What happens is different.

Indirect intent generally occurs in the following two situations: allowing a harmful result to occur in order to achieve a non-criminal intent; Allowing another harmful result to occur in order to achieve a certain criminal intent.

The crimes of negligence mainly include: negligence, that is, the perpetrator should have foreseen that his or her actions might have a result that was harmful to society, but because of negligence, he did not foresee such a result; The fault of overconfidence, in which the perpetrator has foreseen that his or her actions may have a socially harmful result and is gullible enough to avoid it.

3. The volitional factors for the occurrence of harmful results are different.

Indirect intention is to let the results happen, that is, to let them happen, to be indifferent, to tolerate and agree to the occurrence of harmful results. However, the criminal act of negligence itself contains the possibility of the occurrence of consequences that are harmful to society, and it is an act that may change the behavior of the government that endangers society.

1. The difference between direct intent and indirect intent:

Both direct intent and indirect intent of a crime fall under the category of criminal intent. The similarity between the two lies in the fact that, from the perspective of cognitive factors, both clearly recognize that their actions will have harmful consequences to society, and from the perspective of volitional nuclides, neither excludes the occurrence of harmful results.

The differences between the two are:

1) From the perspective of cognitive factors, the actor who is directly intentional is aware of the inevitable occurrence or possible occurrence of harmful results; The perpetrator of indirect intent, on the other hand, is aware of the possibility of a harmful outcome.

2) From the perspective of volitional factors, direct intention is the occurrence of hope, i.e., the active pursuit of harmful results; Indirect intentionality, on the other hand, is to let the results happen. There is a view that when a laissez-faire attitude is taken knowing that the outcome will inevitably occur, it should also be considered indirect intent. We believe that there is no situation in which the actor realizes that the result will inevitably occur and allows it to happen, because laissez-faire is to take a resigned attitude towards the result that is harmful to society, and the premise is that when there are two possibilities of the harmful result occurring or not happening, only in this way can the actor have a mental attitude that it can occur or not happen.

Legal Analysis: The subjective aspect of crime is the first premise to distinguish between intentional crime and negligent crime. Among them, intentional crime is subjectively with knowing and hoping emotions; Negligence, on the other hand, is a kind of negligence or credulity that can be avoided, and does not deliberately pursue a certain result.

The crime of negligence emphasizes a crime of responsibility, which means that the act itself has a prior responsibility to avoid the occurrence of harmful results; Intentional crimes should bear criminal responsibility, knowing that one's conduct will have a result that is harmful to society, and still hoping or allowing such a result to occur.

Legal basis: Article 14 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China: Anyone who clearly knows that his or her conduct will have a result that is harmful to society, and hopes or allows such a result to occur, thus constituting a crime, is an intentional crime. Those who commit intentional crimes shall bear criminal responsibility.

Fifteenth, this pimp should foresee that one's actions may have a result that is harmful to society, and it is a crime of negligence to fail to foresee it because of negligence, or to foresee it and believe that it can be avoided, so that such a result can be avoided. Only those who commit crimes of negligence shall be criminally liable if the law provides for them.