-
Anonymous users2024-02-06It should be thought of as negligence, and accidents cannot be foreseen, avoided, or overcome.
-
Anonymous users2024-02-05Negligent negligence: the content that should be foreseen for unrecognized negligence is the statutory harmful result, which is different from the accident: whether the key point requires that the actor should foresee the occurrence of the harmful result, that is, whether the actor has the duty of care and whether he has the ability to care.
-
Anonymous users2024-02-04Legal Analysis: Accidents and negligent negligence are similar but fundamentally different. The similarity between the two is that neither of the perpetrators foresaw the outcome of their actions.
The essential difference between them is that an accidental event is an accident that the actor could not have foreseen or should not have foreseen but did not foresee the occurrence of the harmful result, while negligent negligence means that the actor could and should have foreseen the possibility of the harmful result of the act, but only failed to foresee it due to negligence. This distinction is not respectful and frank and shows that accidents are not criminally responsible, while negligent negligence is the root cause of crimes. Therefore, it is of great significance to judge whether the actor can foresee it according to the actor's actual cognitive ability and the objective situation at the time, so as to correctly distinguish between the accident and the negligence.
Legal basis: Article 233 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China Whoever causes death by negligence shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than seven years; where the circumstances are more minor, a sentence of up to three years imprisonment is to be given. Where this Law provides otherwise, follow those provisions.
-
Anonymous users2024-02-03Legal Analysis: Negligent negligence is failure to foresee when it should have been foreseen, and unexpected event is failure to foresee because it was unforeseeable. The core point of distinction is whether there is a possibility of foreseeable results.
Legal basis: Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China
Article 15: Paragraph 1: A person who should foresee that his or her conduct might have a result that is harmful to society, and who fails to foresee it because of negligence, or who has foreseen it and is credulous enough to believe that it can be avoided, is guilty of negligence.
Article 16: Where conduct objectively causes harm, it is not a crime if it is not intentional or negligent, but is caused by irresistible or unforeseeable causes.
-
Anonymous users2024-02-02Legal Analysis: The essential difference between them is that an accident is an accident that the actor could not foresee, should not have foreseen, but did not foresee, while negligent negligence means that the actor could and should have foreseen the possibility of the harmful result of the act, and only because of negligence did not foresee it. This distinction also shows that accidents are not criminally responsible, while negligent negligence is the root cause of crimes.
Legal basis: Article 15 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China Crimes of negligence A person who should foresee that his or her actions might have a result that is harmful to society, but because he was negligent and did not foresee it, or had foreseen it and believed that it could have been avoided, so that such a result occurred, it is a crime of negligence.
Only those who commit crimes of negligence shall be criminally liable if the law provides for them.
-
Anonymous users2024-02-01Legal analysis: The essential difference between them is that an accident is that the actor could not have foreseen the occurrence of the harmful result, should not have foreseen but did not foresee it, while the negligent fault is that the actor could and should have foreseen the possibility of the harmful result of the act, but only failed to foresee it due to negligence. This distinction also shows that accidents are not criminally responsible, while negligent negligence is the root cause of crimes.
Legal basis: Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China Article 15 Crimes of negligence A person who should foresee that his or her conduct might lead to a result that endangers society, and who did not foresee it because of negligence, or who had foreseen it and believed that it could have been avoided, and caused such a result to occur with a small surplus, is a crime of negligence.
Only those who commit crimes of negligence shall be criminally liable if the law provides for them.
-
Anonymous users2024-01-31The difference between negligent negligence and accidental events is that negligent negligence is the possibility that the actor can foresee the harmful consequences of the act, and the banquet should be foreseen; An accident is an accident in which the perpetrator could not have foreseen, should not have foreseen, but did not foresee.
Article 16 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China: Although an act objectively causes harm, it is not intentional or negligent, but caused by irresistible or unforeseeable reasons, and is not a crime. Article 15 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that one should foresee that one's own conduct 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 occurs. For crimes of negligence, only those who have provisions in the law shall bear criminal responsibility.
The premise for negligent negligence to be established is that the actor "should have foreseen" that his or her conduct might have consequences harmful to society, and "should have foreseen" includes the actor's obligation to foresee, ability to foresee, foreseeability, and statutory consequences that endanger society. Among them, how to determine "foresight ability" is the focus of controversy in criminal law academic circles, and subjective theories, objective theories and compromise theories have been mainly formed. However, these three theories cannot fully solve the problem of the foresight of the actor, and the author makes a brief analysis of this, arguing that only by understanding the foresight ability as the subjective criterion of the person's correction "after excluding the actor's undue personality defects" can the problem of the foresight of negligent negligence be properly explained. >>>More
1. The so-called accident in criminal law refers to the fact that although the perpetrator has caused objective damage, it is not intentional or negligent, but caused by unforeseeable reasons, which is called an accident in criminal law theory. 2. There is an essential difference between negligence and accident, but in judicial practice, it is often difficult to draw a clear line between negligence and accident, because there are still many similarities between negligence and accident. For example, the perpetrator did not foresee the occurrence of a harmful result in advance; The perpetrators have a negative attitude towards the harmful consequences that will occur. >>>More
I have seen many people who are careless, and the common characteristics are that they do not have high requirements for themselves and are not serious enough about learning and work. >>>More
How do you test your SSD to know if it's good or bad? Nanny-style tutorials.
To get rid of carelessness, we must first face up to ourselves, know our own shortcomings, change from the source, and do things carefully; Then think carefully and think carefully about the problem; Finally, we must seriously summarize and summarize the things that are usually careless, so that we will not do it again next time. >>>More