Allow or agree with minor driving accident would constitute the crime of traffic accident

[introduction] case

　　 Sun is a driver Xiangyang District Jia Musi city in Heilongjiang province. In February 21, 2009, Sun Mou driving to Qitaihe City Peach mountain work, and the sun very well Zhang told the sun in the back when the reading in senior middle school in Qitaihe, the son of Zhang Jia (17 years old) back. At 6 pm, Sun Mou to drive a nail on the road, on the road, Zhang Jia two requirements drive, Sun Mou did not agree, when Zhang Jiadi asked three times and says he is learning to drive a car to drive, has been more than a year, his father asked him to drive a car without any problems, sun one thought on the road in front of the car and people are scarce, the road is better, then gave a few words will drive over to Zhang Jia. After a fork in the road and across a car when they meet, will be a bike knocked down the old man Wang Mou, Wang Mou died on the way to hospital. That the traffic police department, Zhang Jiafu all responsibility for the accident. The public security organs to sun, Zhang Jia is suspected of the crime of causing traffic casualties transferred to the procuratorate for prosecution, people's Procuratorate to sun, Zhang Jia is suspected of the crime of causing traffic casualties to the people's court proceedings.

[the trial]

Procuratorate to sun, Zhang Jia two of the alleged acts of crime of causing traffic casualties prosecution to the court. After court, formed a collegial panel to conduct a public trial, prosecutors assigned inspector Lee public prosecution in court, the defendant and attorney discipline of a sun, Zhang Jia and attorney Zhou attended the court proceedings. After a collegiate bench and the judicial committee for discussion and decision, the court decision defendant Zhang Jiafan crime of causing traffic casualties, was sentenced to six months in prison a year of probation sentence Sunmou innocence.

[opinion]

In the court during the trial, after the collegiate bench, to Zhang Jia constitute the crime of traffic accident no objection, crime form the following two all however opposite but the sun is a traffic accident:

A kind of opinion thinks, Sun Mou and agreed to allow a piece of minor driving, driving the same to adults has the same properties, according to the provisions of the criminal law interpretation of the traffic accident, can be identified by their acts constitute the crime of traffic accident.

Another view was that, Sun Mou and agreed to allow a piece of minor driving, and "allow" and "agree" and "who" are different in nature, its behavior is not allowed and agreed to a traffic accident crime behavior, and according to the provisions of the criminal law interpretation of the traffic accident, can not identify their behavior constitutes the crime of causing traffic casualties.

Finally, the Court adopted the second point of view

[comment]

The defendant Zhang Jia is seventeen years old, to the criminal responsibility, in the driving process, in violation of the traffic regulations, accident, the old man Wang Mou death, in accordance with the provisions of the traffic accident crime in our criminal law, therefore, to constitute a traffic accidents is beyond doubt. But the key question in the case of the sun also constitute the crime of traffic accident. According to the provisions on Several Issues concerning the specific application of law in the trial of criminal cases of traffic accidents in the seventh interpretation of the Supreme People's Court: in charge of personnel, units of motor vehicles or motor vehicles of all Contractor instigate, or force others to drive significant traffic regulations, with the interpretation of the provisions of article second of the traffic accident crime, conviction and punishment. On the surface, not by Sunmou nor forced Zhang Jia driving, but is the object Sunmou permit and consent is a 17 year-old minors, its behavior is equivalent to instigate adults driving behavior, or whether the behaviors identified as sun their behavior. I think the answer is negative, the main reasons are as follows:

First of all, Sun Mou and agreed to allow minors under the age of 17 pieces of a driving behavior, can not be equated to instigate adults driving behavior.

The Supreme People's Court on the crime of causing traffic casualties explained: "unit person, motor vehicles or motor vehicles of all Contractor instigate, or force others to illegal driving cause a major accident, with the interpretation of the provisions of article second of the situation, with traffic accident crime shall be convicted and punished." In general, this provision refers to a vehicle control people rely on this right and management position to request others to do is not willing to do the driving behavior -- were forced, or reluctant to do but due to some factors to do -- was made, that is directly caused by traffic accident were in the passive state of driving on this thing. This case is clearly not the case. But the problem is a piece of sun permission and consent is a 17 year-old minors, not adults. This analysis of Zhang Jia asked whether driving a clear understanding, this is not his true meaning. It should be said, a 17 years old man can know clearly about driving consequences, also is his real intention, not passive problems here.

Secondly, Sun Mou and agreed to allow minors under the age of 17 pieces of a driving behavior, should not be considered as the sun their behavior.

A vehicle with the right people and agreed to allow minors to drive traffic accident behavior, if not instigate or force representation, Is it right? Can because none of those who instigate or force and no margin of crime? If a person without capacity for civil conduct, because he doesn't have the ability to identify and control of driving behavior, that his driving behavior can think is allowed or agree with his driver's behavior, which makes sense in theory and the reason of indirect principal, also known as. The person with limited capacity for civil conduct is not lump together, such as how it is some eleven children at the age of two I drive, this should he have no ability to identify and control treatment, but for some 17 to 18 year olds, learning to drive a car and a certain time, it can be as an adult. A piece of this case that belong to this latter case.

In view of this, the sun and agreed to allow minors under the age of 17 pieces of a driving behavior, can not be equivalent to instigate adults driving behavior, not the behavior deemed as Sunmou own behavior, namely the sun allowed and agreed to behavior does not accord with the constitutive elements of the crime of traffic accident, does not constitute the crime of traffic accident. Is right the court made the ruling.