Female Lijiang disfigurement victim withdraws civil lawsuit?

Recently, new progress has been made in the case that a sensational woman was beaten and disfigured while traveling in Lijiang. Last night, Weibo, the official of the old town of Lijiang Court, announced that the victim Dong Moumou filed a criminal incidental civil lawsuit, and the plaintiff Dong Moumou and the six defendants reached a settlement on their own, which has been actually fulfilled.

On July 5, 20 17, Dong Moumou, the plaintiff in criminal incidental civil action, applied to our hospital to withdraw the prosecution. After examination, the application was in compliance with the law, and the court ruled that Dong Moumou, the plaintiff in criminal incidental civil action, was allowed to withdraw the prosecution.

This news aroused the enthusiasm of netizens. Of course, there is nothing wrong with the concept. Generally speaking, it is true that the civil part of compensation is not pursued, but why is the "criminal" part removed! Why shouldn't the judiciary investigate the responsibility?

Typical point of view: "Reconciliation is reconciliation, illegality is illegality, and law and human feelings cannot be confused. It is understandable that the victim should not pursue this charge. What does it mean that the judicial department does not pursue this crime? " Netizens believe that the court's ruling allows the "plaintiff in criminal incidental civil action" to withdraw the lawsuit, that is, even the "criminal responsibility" has been withdrawn, which is obviously a misunderstanding of the judicial procedure and litigation system.

This itself is only a defect of legal knowledge, and there is nothing. However, after a netizen familiar with the legal concept explained and popularized it, a lot of comments appeared below, saying that the netizen was "blind" and didn't see that this was a "criminal incidental civil action" to withdraw the lawsuit?

This is a typical legal illiteracy. If you don't understand the law, you don't admit that you don't understand it, but you firmly believe that you do (not pretending to understand, but firmly believe that you do).

I might as well popularize it here: "criminal incidental civil action" is a complete and single concept, not the sum of "criminal" and "incidental civil action", but specifically refers to the civil part of this criminal case. This case is a public prosecution case, and the criminal part is prosecuted by the procuratorate on behalf of the state. The plaintiff of "criminal incidental civil action" is not the plaintiff of criminal case, and her litigation status is the victim. She has no right to withdraw the criminal action, except for private prosecution cases.

However, if the criminal proceedings are not private prosecution cases, the settlement of incidental civil proceedings will not affect the overall trend of criminal proceedings, but it may have a certain impact on sentencing. Netizens don't have to worry that the revocation of the "criminal incidental civil action" will let the criminal suspect escape the punishment of the law. Whether it is compensation for losses or more economic compensation, it is actually a manifestation of legal responsibility and behavioral consequences.

It is the legitimate interest of the parties to actively strive for compensation or compensation. When the fact of disfigurement has become a reality, they will get some opportunities for change through greater economic compensation, which is an act of legal protection. Why should they help others decide whether they want the money or not?

To a large extent, I am afraid that it is because this money has nothing to do with us that many netizens are angry. Perhaps this is the bigger reason why some netizens spray this case.