Road rage Hitting someone with a car is not considered justified defense

We all know that there are symptoms, and there is no justification for self-defense, and I can control it a little bit.

It doesn't belong.

Because one of the four principles of justifiable defense is violated, that is, if the unlawful infringement has been stopped, or the unlawful infringement of the other party cannot continue due to one's own reasons, it is the crime of intentional injury to injure the other party.

Combined with the actual situation of this case, you have already sat in the car, and the car can drive normally, the possibility of you being injured is zero, you should leave as soon as possible at this time, and then call the police, instead of hitting and injuring him. Injuries are committed in the form of intentional injury. However, you can also tell the police that you were too nervous, your mind was blank, and your hands and feet didn't obey the call, so you ran into it.

Your testimony will be accepted by the court and will have a significant impact on the final outcome at trial.

Apparently not. What is required for justifiable defence is an ongoing unlawful offense. If the other party injures you, you drive into someone after the assault is over, and it does not constitute legitimate defense.

Hitting and injuring someone while fleeing is not legitimate defense, and can be regarded as emergency evacuation. Civil liability is required. If you intentionally hit him, it constitutes intentional injury and bears criminal liability.

In a tube, please don't spray it.

No, it is recommended to call the police and let the police deal with it.

If you hit it by car.

It is excessive defense, and corresponding legal responsibility shall be borne, but the punishment may be mitigated or commuted.

As long as you have money, you can be killed.

There is no excessive defense in the justifiable defense of several violent crimes such as robbery and **. You are in self-defense.

You've already opened your mouth to curse, and he's beating people. Both parties are already responsible, after which you hit him with your car. Hurting each other is no longer legitimate defense.

Legitimate defense definitely doesn't count, it's a mutual assault, you have a minor injury of the second degree, it's enough for him to be sentenced to 3 years, find a lawyer to sue, according to his economic situation, ask for as much money as possible, open to ask, but don't run away (generally according to his total income for 3 years), give enough money to forgive you can sentence less, and if you don't give enough, let him go to prison

It's not justified defense, it's intentional injury.

Unless the other person is driving or sitting in the car, or if they just threaten to hit you with a car, then there is no danger, it is not justified defense.

If the "unless" condition in the previous paragraph is met, what is the purpose of smashing the car, if it is to prevent the other party from driving and hitting you, then it constitutes justifiable defense, and nothing else.

Supplement: According to your supplemental note, it can basically be determined that it is justified defense.

First of all, you see if he has already driven on you, if you drive you can call the police, it's not okay to smash the car, it's okay to beat that person, of course, don't hurt someone, otherwise you have to pay for medical expenses... Hope it helps.

It is not considered legitimate defense, and it is necessary to pay for his car, and the responsibility lies with both parties.

It depends on why you hit Luo Everything has a reason.

This should be judged to be overdefensive.

It depends on which country? The laws of Chinese mainland. Hehe, there is no fixed law. Social experience is often more binding than law. I don't know if you understand it or not.