Case study of forestry administrative law enforcement certificate exam questions

Article 39 of the Forest Law of the People's Republic of China: "Anyone who illegally logs down forests or other forests shall compensate for losses in accordance with law; The competent forestry department shall order the replanting of illegally felled trees dozens of times, confiscate the illegally felled trees or the proceeds from the sale, and impose a fine of not less than three times but not more than ten times the value of the illegally felled trees.

In the case of indiscriminate felling of forests or other forest trees, the competent forestry department shall order the replanting of trees five times the number of trees that have been indiscriminately felled, and impose a fine of not less than two times but not more than five times the value of the indiscriminately felled trees.

There is no mention of damages, confiscation of trees or proceeds of such sale.

Revaccination and fines are discretionary and cannot be said to be wrong.

Migrant workers should not be subject to administrative punishment, but may be suspected of criminal offenses.

Personally, I think the result is incorrect, because Wang hired workers to cut down other people's trees without applying for a felling permit, which constitutes a knife case, and the illegal felling of standing trees accumulates cubic meters, which exceeds the standard for filing a criminal case, so I think it should be dealt with according to the crime of illegal logging.

Migrant workers who cut trees for him in order to get paid for the trees they felled even though they knew that they were not owned by Wang should constitute an accomplice to the crime of illegal logging.

1. Illegal logging. Reason: Wen's cross-border felling of 15 fir trees was not within the scope of the felling license;

2. Wang does not constitute illegal acquisition of stolen cherry trees and indiscriminate felling of trees. Wen issued a felling permit when he was timber, concealing the truth that the timber was illegal;

3. There is something inappropriate. Article 38 of the Regulations on the Implementation of the Forest Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates: If the illegal felling of forests or other forest trees is calculated as more than 0 5 cubic meters or more than 20 young trees based on the volume of standing timber, the competent forestry department of the people's government at or above the county level shall order the replanting of 10 times the number of illegally felled trees, confiscate the illegally felled trees or the proceeds from sale, and impose a fine of 5 to 10 times the value of the illegally felled trees.

According to the above terms, the order to replant 150 trees is correct, the compensation of 800 yuan for a state-owned forest farm should be 400 yuan for the sale, and the fine of 1,500 yuan should be 2,000 yuan (5 times) - 4,000 yuan (10 times).

1. Wen's behavior is illegal logging. Because: Wen instructed to cut down the trees of a certain B forest farm before Songshan did not start to harvest the 15th forest class (transferred forest) of the first forest farm; Knowing that it is not within the scope of the forest land that he has transferred, he has a subjective will; Profit has been made.

However, Wen's behavior did not constitute the crime of "stealing and logging trees", and could only be punished as "illegal logging".

2. Wang's behavior does not constitute illegal acquisition of illegal logging or indiscriminate felling of trees. Because: Wen showed a "forest felling permit" when selling timber.

It is impossible for Wang to identify the authenticity of the "forest felling permit". However, Wang must establish a "timber purchase ledger" to clearly indicate the name of the seller, felling license number and other information of the purchased timber.

3. The punishment of Wang by the Forestry Bureau of County A was incorrect. If Wang had established a "timber purchase ledger in the middle of the field", Wang should not be punished; If Wang does not have a "timber purchase ledger", he should be instructed to establish a "timber purchase ledger" based on education.

【Answer】a. March analysis: because the timber inspection station does not have the qualifications of an administrative body, it is a dispatched agency of the county forestry bureau, so it cannot exercise the right to punish in its own name, so it can only exercise the right to punish in the name of the county forestry bureau.

The county forestry bureau, as a specialized administrative agency, has the qualification of an administrative body. Therefore, a should be selected for this question.

(1) How should Zhao's behavior be characterized? (2 points).

Zhao constituted the crime of sabotaging production and operation. Zhao cut down a walnut tree that was hanging fruit, and violated a specific object, which is the key to distinguishing it from destroying public and private property. Since this question does not explain Zhao's subjective purpose (if the purpose is to possess walnuts, it constitutes the crime of theft, the purpose is to possess walnut trees, it constitutes the crime of illegal logging, and the purpose is to vent personal anger or other personal purposes, it constitutes the crime of sabotage of production and operation), so it is inferred that the crime of sabotage of production and business operation is constituted.

2) How should the people's police handle Sun's report? (2 points).

1. Question the informant Sun.

2. Where it is found that a crime is constituted, fill out a registration form for accepting a criminal case.

3) Is it correct for the forest public security organ to decide to turn it into a criminal case after it has been established as a public security case? Why? (3 points).

Do it right. This is because in the course of investigating a public security case, it is found that there are criminal facts that need to be investigated for criminal responsibility, and it should be turned into a criminal case for filing and investigation.

4) Can Sun request to withdraw the report? Why? (3 points).

It is not possible to request that the case be dismissed. The crime of sabotage of production and business operation is a public prosecution case, and the victim has no right to request that the report be withdrawn.

Case study of forest public security law enforcement qualification examination 6, (1) How should Zhao's behavior be characterized? (2 points).

2) How should the people's police handle Sun's report? (2 points) (3) Is it correct for the forest public security organ to decide to turn it into a criminal case after it has been established as a public security case? Why? (3 points).

4) Can Sun request to withdraw the report? Why? (3 points).

1.There are two theories on Wang's act of encouraging Sun: one is that Wang is guilty of intentionally destroying property (instigator), and at the same time, the Criminal Law stipulates that abetting a person under the age of 18 should be punished heavily.

There is also a view that Wang was found to be an indirect principal offender of the crime of intentional destruction of property, and that he used Sun to be 15 years old and under the age of criminal responsibility to achieve the expected criminal purpose by using people.

Later, he went to Sun's house and stole more than 4,000 yuan, and the theft was completed.

2.Based on the above analysis, if it is found that Sun X has committed a joint crime of intentional destruction of property, it is considered that he has not reached the statutory age of criminal responsibility and does not bear criminal responsibility, and his parents or guardians should be ordered to discipline him; When necessary, it can also be institutionalized by **. If it is found that Wang is an indirect principal offender, then Sun is not guilty and does not bear criminal responsibility.

3.When Wang X goes to the public security organ to turn himself in and return the stolen goods, the circumstances of the voluntary surrender should be considered when sentencing, and the punishment for the crime of theft shall be mitigated or commuted as appropriate. Because it reports the counterfeiting den and provides clues that are conducive to solving the case, it constitutes meritorious service (depending on the specific circumstances to see whether a major meritorious service has been established), and the punishment should also be mitigated or commuted as appropriate at sentencing.

1. If the characterization is wrong, robbery should be determined. Reason, Zhu was found to be in the theft, and in order to escape the pursuit of his neighbors, he committed violence, which is a transformed robbery.

2. There are problems: 1. The auxiliary police should not be allowed to participate in the interrogation, because the interrogation can only be conducted by public security personnel; 2. Zhu's mobile phone that is not related to the case should not be seized; 3. 5,000 yuan should not be returned to the owner, but should be returned to the owner after verification and formalities; 4. If there are no formalities in the interrogation, there are also problems, and legal procedures such as summons or summons should be taken.

1. Zhu is suspected of robbery.

2. Review by two police officers; Approved by the leaders of the county bureau of the case; Zhu's mobile phone does not need to be seized; 5,000 yuan was seized and returned to Jia; dagger seizure; Wu did an injury appraisal; Non-wandering can only be extended to seven days; Zhu's family was notified within 24 hours of being detained; interrogation of Zhu within 24 hours of criminal detention; Extension of detention for the approval of the head of the county magistrate.

The "Provisions on Forestry Administrative Punishment Procedures" stipulates the general procedures:

25th investigation and handling of forestry administrative punishment cases shall not be less than two.

26th forestry administrative departments when collecting evidence, in the case that the evidence may be lost or difficult to obtain later, with the approval of the person in charge of the administrative organ, may be registered and preserved, fill in the notice of registration and preservation of forestry administrative penalties, and shall make a decision in a timely manner within seven days, during this period, the parties or relevant personnel shall not destroy or transfer the evidence.

27th forestry administrative law enforcement personnel shall comprehensively, impartially and objectively collect and collect all kinds of evidence. When necessary, they may work with relevant departments to collect and collect all kinds of evidence. The evidence collection and collection facility shall make a record, and the investigator and the relevant parties are to sign or affix a seal to the record.

28th forestry administrative law enforcement personnel investigating and handling forestry administrative punishment cases shall ask the parties or other insiders (hereinafter referred to as the questioned), and make a record of forestry administrative punishment inquiry. Where the person being questioned refuses to answer, it does not impact the determination of the facts of the case on the basis of evidence.

The record of the interrogation shall be given to the person being questioned for verification, and shall be read to those who do not have the ability to read; Where the person being questioned submits supplements or corrections, it shall be permitted; After the person being questioned confirms that the record is correct, they shall sign or affix a seal to the record; Where the person being questioned refuses to sign or affix a seal, this shall be noted in the record, and the questioner shall also sign or affix a seal to the record. Where the person being questioned requests to write on their own, it shall be permitted; When necessary, forestry administrative law enforcement personnel may also require the person being questioned to write, and the self-writing shall have his signature or seal.