Usually, according to the basic behavior and aggravated behavior of the actor, several crimes are punished together. However, this treatment may lead to the situation that "the crime and punishment are not compatible", that is, the combined sentencing of the two crimes still cannot reasonably evaluate the behavior of the actor. At this time, the purpose of establishing aggravated consequential offense is to improve the prescribed punishment for a crime, so as to achieve the purpose of better punishing crimes and embody the principle of adapting crime to punishment. Aggravated consequential offense is a kind of situation of statutory penalty escalation conditions.
Subjective conditions for the establishment of aggravated consequential offense: aggravated consequential offense is at least negligence.
The actor can be intentional or negligent in the basic criminal behavior; For the aggravated result, it is at least negligence. If there is no negligent behavior, the aggravated consequential offense can never be established, and if the basic behavior is negligent, the aggravated consequential offense can only be negligence.
Subjective conditions for the establishment of aggravated consequence crime: the actor must know the premise and basic facts that lead to aggravated consequence.
For example, if Party A intentionally hurts Party B and sees Party B standing at the door of the stairs, Party A collides with Party B, resulting in Party B falling down the stairs and dying, which can be divided into the following three situations:
(1) If Party A knows that there is a step behind him, and the step may lead to the death of Party B, but Party A still chooses to intentionally hit someone, and Party B falls down the step and dies, then Party A commits the crime of intentional homicide;
(2) If Party A knows that there is a step behind Party B, which may lead to Party B's death, but Party A is at fault at this time (such as thinking that the step will not lead to death, or being too confident to believe that Party B will not die), then Party A commits the crime of intentional injury and death.
(2) If Party A fails to realize that there are steps behind Party B, at this time, Party A is at fault for the result of death caused by rolling down the steps of Party B (if there is evidence that Party A should have foreseen the steps here but did not foresee them, and subjectively did not want the death result to happen), then an imaginative joinder of intentional injury and negligent death is established; If it is impossible for A to know the steps behind B, that is, there is no fault, then A is only guilty of intentional injury at this time.