Is manual defense legally the use of the owner?

To be considered justifiable defense, it is necessary to determine whether there is a question of excessive defense.

II. The Criminal Law Determines the Practical Significance of the Justifiable Defense System.

1) Justifiable defense is conducive to protecting national interests, public interests, and citizens' lawful rights and interests from ongoing unlawful infringements.

2) Legitimate defense is conducive to encouraging the masses of the people to struggle against ongoing illegal acts of aggression and to deter criminals from acting rashly.

3) The system of justifiable defense is of great significance in distinguishing between crime and non-crime, between justifiable defense and excessive defense, and whether the person who defends himself is criminally responsible.

See page 233 of the Book of Meditation Are you also Suda?

Effectively protect the legitimate rights and interests of the state, collectives and individuals from being infringed upon. It can also be effective in stopping crime.

Not necessarily. If he doesn't do it, you can't do it, and if he does it and then admits defeat, if you still beat it, it's not called justified defense. It can be resolved peacefully, and it can be resolved as peacefully as possible. Otherwise, it's better to call the police and let others get involved.

Or maybe it's overly defensive! First of all, it is necessary to endanger your own safety, and then you fight back to defend yourself, if the other party just comes to make a big noise and smash things. Call the police and wait for the police to come.

First of all, you have to call the police, they belong to the trespass on the house itself is a crime, if you do it, you can fight back, it depends on the actual situation, if they really threaten your life, you can give a counterattack, but be careful of excessive defense.

This question seems to have been taken in the judicial examination, and the focus of the dispute in this case is.

1) Was defendant Li's act of privately setting up a power grid to prevent theft a legitimate defense?

2) If Li's actions were not justified defense, then what crimes did Li's actions constitute? How is their subjective guilt determined?

1) Li's conduct was not justified defense, but excessive defense. The so-called justifiable defense refers to the act of stopping the unlawful infringement by means of causing damage to the wrongdoer in order to protect the state, the public interest, the person, property and other rights of the person or others from the ongoing unlawful infringement. Justifiable defence includes the use of a defensive device to defend itself.

In this question, the defendant Li privately set up a power grid in order to protect his property rights from illegal infringement. Its purpose is to prevent theft. Although the defense device is pre-set, the defense effect is produced when the unlawful infringement occurs, so it also meets the requirement of timeliness of defense.

Of course, there are also cases where defense is carried out by defense devices and there are cases where defense is too bad and defense is not appropriate due to malfunction. Therefore, for the act of illegally setting up a power grid for anti-theft, it cannot be denied that the actor subjectively has the intention of defense, and objectively has a certain degree of defense, but the death of the fish thief due to anti-theft is obviously exceeding the necessary limit and causing major damage, which is excessive defense.

2) Li's conduct constituted the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means, and was convicted and punished in accordance with Article 115, Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Law. Defendant Li's act of erecting a power grid around the fish pond violated the lives of an unspecified number of people, and may even injure innocent people. Although warning signs are written when the power grid is erected, this warning measure is completely ineffective when there are no lights at night.

Therefore, his conduct constitutes the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means.

The defendant has a hopeful or laissez-faire attitude towards the outcome that the power grid may cause serious injury or death to the thief, and does not have a hopeful attitude about the possibility that an innocent person may be electrocuted or seriously injured, but if it is only a volitional unhope and does not take any measures to prevent the accidental injury or death of an innocent person, then it is obviously a laissez-faire. Combined with this case, Li also took active rescue measures after Wang was electrocuted, which shows that Li only subjectively held a laissez-faire attitude towards the thief. Therefore, the form of Wang's subjective guilt in this case is indirect intent.

First of all, Wang was guilty of theft, and he died in the process of stealing, and then when he died, he could not commit any other crime.

Li first illegally erected the power grid, violating national laws.

Secondly, he was guilty of fraud, falsifying the cause of death of the deceased, challenging the authority of the law, and trying to get out of it himself.

Answer: The fact that the house has not been completed for filing and acceptance and handed over to the owner for use should be a substantial delivery.

Two years later, Chishui met Hu Lang and the Eight Immortals in the mountains, rushed to Pi's house together, and reunited with the Phoenix Immortals. At the banquet, Fengxian was dissatisfied with her father's love and hatred based on the rich and the poor, and urged Chishui to study angrily and fight for herself.

Renovation time, and which can not be renovated can not be transformed.

There is no property law, China's "Property Law" stipulates that the parking spaces and garages planned in the community should first meet the needs of the owners, and be used by means of ** and gifts; Parking spaces that occupy the common land of the owners are jointly owned by the owners.

That is to say, the property company does not have the right to plan parking spaces at will, especially the following 3 types, which are illegal to do without permission. In particular, the following 3 types are illegal to take ** privately.

2. Underground civil air defense parking space. The underground civil air defense parking space in the community belongs to the parking space built in the civil air defense project of the community and used for parking in non-wartime. The lawyer believes that the civil air defense parking space is exercised by the civil air defense management department on behalf of the state, and this kind of parking space cannot apply for a property right certificate, and the ownership does not belong to the developer or all the owners.

3. Underground parking spaces that have been shared. If the area of the underground parking space has been shared by the owners of the community as a shared area, then the developer has no right to **. In other words, when selling the house, the area of the underground parking space has been allocated to each owner, and the money has been collected proportionally, and then such an underground parking space is sold to the owner, which is to collect money repeatedly.

The parking fee is set by all the owners of the community at the owners' meeting, that is, the owners of the community themselves set, the property is just managed on behalf of the property, and the money is finally included in the housing maintenance fund except for the basic expenses, such as taxes and labor costs.

Property Management Ordinance.

Chapter 5 Use and Maintenance of Property.

Article 55: Where the common parts of the property or the common facilities and equipment are used for business, the relevant formalities shall be completed in accordance with the provisions after obtaining the consent of the relevant owners, the general meeting of owners, and the property management enterprise. The income obtained by the owners shall be mainly used to supplement the special maintenance funds, and may also be used in accordance with the decision of the general meeting of owners.

Chapter VI: Legal Responsibility.

66th in violation of the provisions of these Regulations, any of the following acts, by the local people's ** real estate administrative departments at or above the county level shall be ordered to rectify within a time limit, give a warning, and in accordance with the provisions of the second paragraph of this article shall be fined; The proceeds shall be used for the maintenance and maintenance of the common parts of the property and the common facilities and equipment in the property management area, and the remaining part shall be used in accordance with the decision of the owners' general meeting

A) unauthorized change in the property management area in accordance with the planning of the construction of public buildings and common facilities;

2) Unauthorized occupation or excavation of roads and sites in the property management area, harming the common interests of the owners;

3) Unauthorized use of common parts of the property, common facilities and equipment for business.

Where individuals have any of the conduct provided for in the preceding paragraph, a fine of between 1,000 and 10,000 RMB is to be given; Where units have any of the conduct provided for in the preceding paragraph, a fine of between 50,000 and 200,000 RMB is to be given.

Vehicle management fee is used for personnel and other expenses.

Of course, there is a certain amount of profit