Chapter 601 There Is an Inexplicable Heaviness

"We are now conducting evidence and cross-examination. Do the prosecutors, defenders and defendants have any new evidence that they need to submit?" the presiding judge asked.

"No." Sanfang said.

"The prosecutor will present the evidence first," the presiding judge said.

Fang Yi had seen the evidence catalog and related evidence submitted by the prosecutor before. He recognized the evidence in the case, and the defendant had no objection to the evidence.

…

“The facts of this case have been clearly investigated, the court investigation has ended, and now the court debate has begun. The court debate mainly revolves around the disputed facts that have not been certified by the court and the issue of how the law should be applied based on the facts.

The prosecutor will speak first. "The chief judge said.

"Presiding Judge, Judge: The prosecutor believes that the defendant Tang Renguo and the victim Tang Ming have a father-son relationship, and the object of the defendant's robbery is the common family property of Tang Ming and his wife.

According to Article 7 of the "Opinions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Criminal Cases of Robbery and Robbery", those who obtain the property of family members or close relatives by violence, coercion or other means for personal use shall generally not be convicted of robbery. Punishment that constitutes other crimes shall be handled in accordance with the relevant provisions of the criminal law.

In the process of robbing his own money, the defendant Tang Renguo committed murder with an armed weapon. He failed to succeed due to reasons other than his will, and his behavior constituted the crime of intentional homicide (attempt).

In view of the fact that the defendant attempted murder, caused serious injuries, and caused significant economic losses to the victim, we recommend that the defendant be sentenced to death with a two-year suspended sentence. complete. "After the prosecutor finished speaking, he put down the A4 paper in his hand.

Tang Ming, who was sitting in the gallery, did not feel particularly relieved after listening to the prosecutor's speech. The joy in his eyes only lasted for a moment. After the joy passed, he felt an inexplicable heaviness in his heart.

Jia Zongxia's reaction was different from his. After hearing the prosecutor's sentencing recommendations, her heart suddenly tugged, her eyes filled with worry, her hands tightly grasping the armrests of the chair, and her body trembling slightly.

According to the trial procedure, the next step was the defendant's self-defense. The defendant Tang Renguo did not cry anymore. His self-defense was more like a narrative. He admitted everything he had done, but he believed that when he was arrested, he went to the police station to surrender. Ask the court for a lenient punishment.

"The defendant's defender expressed his defense opinion." The presiding judge looked at Fang Yi.

"Presiding Judge, Judge: The defender believes that defendant Tang Renguo's behavior does not constitute intentional homicide but robbery. The reasons are as follows:

1. Defendant Tang Renguo robbed family property, constituting the crime of robbery.

According to Article 7, paragraph 2, of the "Opinions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Criminal Cases of Robbery and Robbery" (Fafa [2005] No. 8), instigating or collaborating with others to use violence, coercion and other means to rob family members or the property of a close relative, may be convicted and punished for robbery.

According to the "Reply of the Supreme People's Court on How to Convict Cases of Intentional Homicide During Robbery" (Fa Interpretation [2001] No. 16), the actor premeditated intentional homicide in order to rob property, or in the process of robbing property, to subdue the victim to resist Those who intentionally kill will be convicted and punished for robbery. If the perpetrator commits robbery and intentionally kills someone to silence him, he will be convicted of robbery and intentional homicide, and shall be punished for multiple crimes.

The defender believes that Tang Renguo is over 18 years old, an adult, and has the ability to live independently. However, because the victim and the defendant have not separated the family assets, Tang Renguo, as a family member who lived with Tang Ming, also contributed to the family income. Therefore, the family The property should be identified as the joint property of the defendant Tang Renguo and his parents. It should not be regarded as the common property of Tang Ming and his wife.

In this case, the defendant Tang Renguo and Jiang Sanfu (Huang Mao) went to the supermarket run by his family to make money. During the robbery (robbery), the defendant beat the victim seriously and injured him. His ultimate goal was to make money.

It can be seen from the defendant's behavior before going to his own supermarket to get money, and then after seriously injuring the victim and robbing the family's shared money. It can be seen that the defendant's purpose was to rob his own supermarket, not to kill people, and beat the victim just to facilitate the robbery.

The defendant's behavior complied with the provisions of Article 7 of the "Reply of the Supreme People's Court on the Conviction of Intentional Homicide Cases During Robbery" and the "Opinions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Criminal Cases of Robbery and Snatching". This case should be characterized For robbery.

2. Defendant Tang Renguo’s act of entering the supermarket rest room to rob should not be considered as ‘house robbery’.

According to Article 1 of the "Opinions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Criminal Cases of Robbery and Robbery", 'household' refers to a residence, which is characterized by two aspects: providing family life for others and being relatively isolated from the outside world. The former are functional characteristics, and the latter are place characteristics.

According to Article 2 of the Supreme People's Court's "Guiding Opinions on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Laws in the Trial of Criminal Cases of Robbery" regarding the identification of some aggravating circumstances for the crime of robbery, for a place that is engaged in business part of the time and used for daily life part of the time, the perpetrator shall not Anyone who forcibly enters and robs a house during business hours, or who deceives the door into a house and robs in the name of shopping, shall be deemed as 'house-invasion robbery'.

For places that are partly used for business and partly used for living, and there is a clear separation between them, if the perpetrator enters the living place to commit robbery, it should be deemed as 'house robbery'.

If there is no clear separation between places, if the perpetrator enters and commits robbery during business hours, it will not be deemed as 'house robbery', but if the perpetrator commits robbery after non-business hours, it should be deemed as 'house robbery'.

In this case, the defendant Tang Renguo entered the rest room of his supermarket in the early morning to commit robbery. It seems to meet the characteristics of "household robbery" in the above-mentioned guidelines. However, judging from the photos of the crime scene provided by the prosecutor, the rest room of the small supermarket The room is not actually a living area. It is just a temporary single bed for supermarket owner Tang Ming to rest. Most of the area is occupied by goods. It is actually a warehouse and part of the supermarket. Therefore, this case does not constitute a home invasion robbery.

In addition, Tang Renguo and Tang Ming are family members living together. Regardless of whether he enters his father Tang Ming's resting place with Tang Ming's consent or not, it does not constitute illegal intrusion.

From the perspective of traditional ethics and moral concepts, it is normal for children to enter their parents' bedroom or house, regardless of whether they are adults or live separately from their parents, and it does not constitute the crime of illegal intrusion into the house.

Therefore, the robbery committed by the defendant Tang Renguo into the rest room of the supermarket and the victim Tang Ming could not be determined as 'house robbery'.

3. The defendant has the circumstances to surrender.

The defendant Tang Renguo in this case took the initiative to come to the public security organ after committing the crime and truthfully confessed the main criminal facts after being interrogated. Therefore, Tang Renguo's behavior constituted surrender.

To sum up, on the day of the incident, the defendant Tang Renguo and others came to his supermarket in order to get money (robbery). After that, he was rejected when he asked for money. He had a quarrel with the victim Tang Ming, beat the victim seriously, and then robbed the victim. He fled the scene after taking 53,800 yuan in cash.

From beginning to end, the defendant had only one criminal purpose, which was to make money. He did not have the purpose of killing when he returned home, and the existing evidence on record cannot prove that the defendant had the purpose of killing. Therefore, the defender believed that the defendant committed the crime of robbery. It does not constitute intentional homicide.

In view of the fact that the defendant showed remorse and surrendered, and the money robbed belongs to the family's common property and is less harmful to society, the defender recommended that the court sentence the defendant to ten years in prison. complete. "Fang Yi expressed his defense opinion.