Dangerous driving crime in the criminal law of Japan

Zhou Mingchuan lawyer

Wuhan University, doctor of law, master's tutor, 15821499417. 

   To adapt to punish drunk driving and other highly dangerous driving behavior of public opinion, "criminal law amendment (eight)" twenty-second added the crime of dangerous driving, drunk driving and drag racing punishment behavior. Therefore, some people think, drunk driving behavior into criminal, too emotional. This view of? Compared to the relevant provisions of the criminal law of Japan, may give us some useful enlightenment.

   In Japan, in addition to the "criminal law" article 208th "two provisions of dangerous driving deadly injury blame" 211st ", the provisions of the second paragraph of the motor vehicle driver's deadly injury blame", in "road traffic law" in the provisions of the applicable scope is very extensive in many dangerous driving crime. Not only punishThe drunkDriving, and punishmentDrunkDriving; not only driving and drunk drunk driving punishment, punishment due to the reasons for taking drugs or excessive fatigue and other dangerous driving. In particular, in Japan, in addition to punishment for driving after drinking himself, to provide drivers with vehicle, provides liquor, urging people to drink and asked who carpool, are to be sentenced to a punishment.

   Japan's "road traffic law" provisions of article 117th, knowing that the other side may driving after drinkingProvide the vehicle,If the other party in drunk driving, the provider of 5 years in prison or 1000000 yen a fine, if the other party in the state of drinking driving, providers and 3 years in prison or 500000 yen fine; they might each other after drinking and drivingProvide liquor or other alcohol toThe other, if in drunk driving, the provider or the drink is less than 3 years imprisonment or a fine of 500000 yen, if the other party in the state of drinking driving, the provider or the drink is less than 2 years imprisonment or a fine of 30 million yen; know each other in a state of drunkennessRequirements onWhen the other party to, drunk driving, the requirement is a 3 years period style or 500000 yen fine, knowing each other to drink and request a ride, when the other party to drunk driving, and 2 years in prison or 300000 yen fines on total passenger demand.

   Visible, the Japanese criminal law for driving after drinking behavior punishment scope is extremely widespread, not only punishment for driving after drinking himself, and punished various encourage or tolerate driving after drinking behavior. Among them, drunk driving penalty than drunk driving penalty slightly lighter, judgment criteria for both also have differences. Take the form of standard for drink driving judgment, namely to alcohol drinkers in vivo as the standard, respectively, per milliliter of blood containing more than 0.3 mg per liter of alcohol or breath alcohol more than 0.15 mg; substantive standards adopted for drunken driving judgment, i.e.Identified from the essence of the driver is not normal driving drunkThus, due to the differences in personal physique, so, even if the driver alcohol concentration is not up to 0.3 milligrams per milliliter of blood or breath 0.15 milligrams per liter, may also be considered in a drunken state, rather than direct a felony misdemeanor, in contrast, may also appear alcohol concentration high but still belongs to the misdemeanor case. Therefore, the judge order is generally, first consider whether a felony is drunk, in the exclusion of felony, misdemeanor before considering whether the drunk driving. But if the driver is drunk driving or drunk driving, has direct impact to provide motor vehicles or wine, to wine, driving the driver request carpool or ride whether an act constitutes a crime and penalty.

   Relatively speaking, our country law for driving after drinking behavior punishment too loose. The current law only stipulated in "road traffic law" article ninety-first, for the driving motor vehicles after drinking behavior, can temporarily driving license, a fine or detention. The administrative punishment this too lenient obviously not conducive to the prevention of serious traffic crime. While the "criminal law amendment (eight)" twenty-second only stipulates: "one article is added in article 133rd of the criminal law, as one of 133rd ': 1, driving a motor vehicle on roadCompetitive driving, bad plotOf, or on the roadDrunk driving, detention, and shall also be fined. 2, there are the acts mentioned in the preceding paragraph, which also constitutes another crime, in accordance with the provisions of punishment heavier punishment.'". Visible, and Japanese criminal law widely punishment various driving after drinking behavior, criminal law amendment (eight) for driving after drinking the punishment scope too narrow, only punishment for drunk driving and other driving after drinking is not punished, punish the driver himself without punishment for vehicles, wine, drink or carpool for the driver; and Japanese criminal law on drunk drivers, up to 5 years in prison, "criminal law amendment (eight)" provisions of punishment was too light, because according to the provisions of the criminal law, criminal detention for a period of 1 months or more than 6 months, the number of crimes is not more than 1 years.

   In summary, compared with the Japanese criminal law, "criminal law amendment (eight)" for drunk driving conviction, not too emotional, but too loose. In addition, also has the following obvious shortcomings: one is still not solve the dangerous driving causing death or personal legal punishment is too low the problem, theory and Practice for the deaths and injuries caused by dangerous driving should be the crime of causing traffic casualties or deliberately in other dangerous means to endanger public security crime controversy still exists, therefore, we should set up the dangerous driving cause casualties crime, and the punishment the limit to life imprisonment. The two is the penalty is too light, no meaning, and through the investigation, prosecution, trial, delay for a long time such links, the evidence is very difficult, therefore the operability is not strong. These are not conducive to the prevention and punishment of the increasingly serious traffic crime.