The Composition of Crime under the Vision of Genetics and Structure

Corresponding to the corresponding relationship between subject and object, the status of the constituent elements of the criminal subject should be affirmed, and its criminal constituent status can be described as follows: the criminal subject is the “logical starting point” of the four-element composition of crime, thus the “necessary” and “first” requirement. As the substantive content of the criminal subject, the capacity for criminal responsibility refers to the capacity to commit criminal acts and bear criminal responsibility. As a kind of “relatively evil capacity for freedom of will”, the capacity for criminal responsibility has the attribute of “relatively evil freedom of will”, and its essence is “criminal norm-violating capacity” or “criminal law-violating capacity”, which is “procedural ability” and “structural ability” from “criminal ability” to “criminal ability”. The ability of criminal responsibility is not only the “core” of “the core of the main elements of crime”, that is, the “logical starting point” of crime, but also the most basic “subjective premise” of the theory of punishment. In the four-element composition of crime, the necessity of the criminal object is the philosophical conclusion corresponding to the subject and the object, thus the natural conclusion of the “social relations law”, and the natural conclusion of the explanatory power of the criminal object. The classification and stratification of criminal objects are two different issues. Criminal objects can be classified at the level of similar objects and at the level of direct objects: the former occurs within “crimes of national legal interests”, “crimes of social legal interests” and “crimes of personal legal interests”; while the latter can use the number and carrier form and other standards. In particular, complex objects should be structurally grasped as “means object” and “purpose object” or “cause object” and “result object”. As for the so-called “random objects”, they are “pseudo objects” that need to be clarified. From “total object” to “similar object” and then to “direct object”, it is the content stratification of criminal objects; while from the criminal object at the national level to the criminal object at the social level and then to the criminal object at the individual level, it is the criminal object. The social structure is stratified. The stratification of the criminal object corresponds to the structure of the criminal object, thus reflecting the systematicness and completeness of the criminal law system.