人民法院依法惩治侵害未成年人合法权益典型案例

一、王先华强奸案

（一）基本案情

被告人王先华与刘永翠（被害人之母）同居，双方育有一女王某，刘永翠前夫之女梁某（2007年出生）与其共同生活。 2014年1月18日，王某腿部烫伤出院后回到家中，刘永翠怕梁某晚上睡觉会蹬到王某烫伤处，便让梁某与被告人王先华在另间卧室同睡。当晚，被告人王先华将梁某强奸。

（二）裁判结果

陕西省镇巴县人民法院经审理认为，被告人王先华强行与未满十四周岁的幼女发生性关系，其行为构成强奸罪，应从重处罚，但其当庭自愿认罪，可酌定从轻判处。依照我国刑法相关规定，认定被告人王先华犯强奸罪，判处有期徒刑六年。宣判后，被告人未上诉，公诉机关也未提出抗诉，判决已经发生法律效力。

（三）典型意义

本案是一起性侵未成年继子女的案件。随着社会的发展，再婚家庭中性侵未成年继子女的案件日益成为性侵案件中突出的一类。特别是在偏远、落后的西部山区，生活习惯加之经济条件比较恶劣，再婚后的家长无暇顾及未成年人成长中应当具有的人身防范意识和常识，最终导致再婚的配偶得以甚至长期伤害未成年人，给未成年人造成一生难以愈合的伤痕。此案警示公众：应当加强对妇女儿童普及自我保护的防范意识和常识，共同防治此类恶性案件的发生。

二、曾冰故意伤害案

（一）基本案情

2012年5月，被告人曾冰经人介绍认识了现任丈夫许某，随后即与许某以及许某与前妻生育的女儿小佳（案发时不满3岁）一起生活。为阻止许某与前妻联系，曾冰经常大发雷霆，怀孕后更是时常对非亲生的小佳严厉苛责，打骂不断。

2013年1月1日下午5时，曾冰在家中叫小佳洗澡，小佳哭闹着不愿意。一怒之下，曾冰用手打、推小佳的脸和颈部，小佳跌倒在地上致头部受伤。刚开始，曾冰并未在意，但之后小佳开始神志不清，伴随有呕吐和昏迷症状。曾冰这才叫上亲戚一起将小佳送至医院抢救，但终因伤情太重，小佳于1月7日死亡。经法医鉴定，小佳死亡原因为重型颅脑损伤，左额顶部硬膜下血肿并脑疝形成、脑干功能衰竭。

小佳被打当晚10时许，公安机关在医院将曾冰抓获。由于曾冰当时怀有身孕，2013年1月2日至2014年6月30日，公安机关和检察机关分别对其采取了取保候审措施。2014年7月1日，曾冰被批准逮捕。同年7月7日，检察机关向一审法院提起公诉。

（二）裁判结果

广东省清远市清新区人民法院经开庭审理后，以故意伤害罪对被告人曾冰判处有期徒刑十四年零三个月。一审宣判后，曾冰认为量刑过重提起上诉，认为：1.原判认定上诉人犯故意伤害罪属适用法律错误，其行为属于过失致人死亡，上诉人与被害人共同生活期间一直对其照顾有加。案发时上诉人只是出于教育的目的打了被害人几下，小孩摔倒死亡并非其所愿，且现实中家长教育致小孩死亡有许多案例都是以过失致人死亡定罪处罚。2.被害人父亲曾对上诉人表达过谅解的意思。3.原判未充分考虑其悔罪态度及父母年老、儿子年幼的情形。请求二审法院予以改判。

清远中院经二审审理查明事实后认为，虽然从上诉人曾冰在小佳昏迷后送医院抢救等情况看，其并不积极追求被害人死亡的后果，但是从其殴打方式和部位，以及被害人头部左枕骨粉碎性骨折，颅骨骨缝骨裂状且部分脑组织呈溶解状改变的伤害后果，可见上诉人在实施殴打时的力度，显示其主观上对危害后果的放任，应属间接故意，因此一审认定构成故意伤害罪正确。对于曾冰上诉提出其有积极赔偿的情节，经查属实，同时考虑到该案发生在家庭成员之间，且案发后上诉人积极将被害人送医救治，留在医院守候没有逃走，遂改判曾冰有期徒刑十二年。

（三）典型意义

每年孩子被父母或被家庭成员打死的报道几乎就没有中断过。孩子是父母的骨肉、家庭的希望，在孩子成长的路上，一些父母为什么忍心一次次地下狠手，做出伤害孩子的事情？因为很多人仍然认为家长打骂孩子是天经地义的事，“不打不成才”、“棍棒底下出孝子”是我国相当多的父母信奉的一条古训。

错误的管教观念是导致对孩子施暴的一个主要原因，另外，还有生活困难、工作压力大、未婚先育没有条件抚养、孩子身体智力有缺陷或残疾、重男轻女、父母有恶习、品行不良和精神心理异常等也导致这种伦理惨剧频发。

这类案件反映出，由于未成年人弱小，一些父母并没有把孩子当成独立个体看待，而是将其当成私有财产或物品，甚至当成出气筒、泄愤目标、报复工具。

在未成年人保护法等一系列法律法规中，已明确规定监护人“禁止对未成年人实施家庭暴力”，但在社会观念尚未完全将“父母打孩子”纳入法制视角的情况下，非到打孩子致伤、致残、致死情况下，父母很难受到法律的制裁；在干预机构和措施上，更远没有达到保护儿童不受家庭暴力伤害的程度。因此，有必要站在保护儿童的立场上，认识家庭暴力对儿童的伤害，要对未成年人给予特殊的关注和保护，对未成年人施暴的犯罪分子给予严惩；同时并提出相应的干预对策，遏制这种不良现象，保障孩子的生命尊严不受侵害。

三、刘燕故意伤害案

（一）基本案情

2014年5月3日下午13时许，被告人刘燕因怀疑其子被害人高某某（男，2008年10月13日出生）偷拿家中的钱，遂在广东省潮州市潮安区某镇的出租屋内对高某某进行责问，因高某某不承认偷拿家中财物而心生气愤。刘燕叫高某某把衣服脱光，先用皮带抽打高某某，见高某某还不承认偷拿家中的钱，刘燕更加气愤，又持塑料管持续殴打高某某的头部、背部、四肢等部位，致高某某全身多部位不同程度受伤，直至塑料管折断才停止。当天下午16时许，高某某因被殴打受伤而出现身体不适的症状，刘燕遂将高某某送至医院抢救，经医生抢救发现高某某已死亡。医生遂向公安机关报警，刘燕于当天在医院内被公安民警带回审查。经查，高某某的死因符合全身体表广泛钝性暴力损伤造成创伤性、失血性休克联合心脏挫裂伤死亡。

（二）裁判结果

广东省潮州市潮安区人民检察院以被告人刘燕犯故意伤害罪提起公诉。潮州市潮安区人民法院经审理认为，被告人刘燕因怀疑儿子偷拿家中钱财而心生气愤，持械故意伤害自己的未成年人儿子，致其死亡，其行为已构成故意伤害罪。公诉机关指控罪名成立。被告人刘燕归案后如实供述自己的犯罪事实，且已获得其家属的谅解，依法予以从轻处罚。辩护人提出被告人刘燕的行为构成过失致人死亡罪，上述辩护意见据理不足，不予采纳。辩护人关于被告人具有坦白情节且取得家属谅解，可以从轻处罚的辩护意见，予以采纳。根据被告人的犯罪事实、性质、情节以及对社会的危害程度，依照刑法有关规定，判决被告人刘燕犯故意伤害罪，判处有期徒刑十年。宣判后，没有上诉、抗诉，判决已经发生法律效力。

（三）典型意义

本案是一起父母教育未成年人子女过程中，因教育方式不当而心生气愤，并实施无节制的殴打未成年子女，致子女死亡的案件，属于典型的涉及家庭暴力刑事案件。根据当前刑事政策，对于因恋爱、婚姻、家庭纠纷等民间矛盾激化引发的犯罪，一般酌情从宽处罚，涉及家庭暴力刑事案件也属于“因恋爱、婚姻、家庭纠纷”引发的犯罪。未成年人比起成年人来说，缺乏自我保护能力，极易成为家庭暴力的对象，遭受家庭暴力的伤害后果更加严重；司法对于针对未成年人成员实施暴力的被告人，根据案件的具体情况，可以依法从严惩处。

在本案审理过程中，被告人刘燕虽有如实供述自己的犯罪事实，但其辩称没有故意伤害自己的儿子，声称其不可能故意伤害亲生儿子，当时只是想教育儿子。庭审时，审判长及公诉人均依法对其进行教育，明理释法；法庭宣判时，审判长再次依法对其进行明理释法，告知认定其犯故意伤害罪及判处刑罚的法律依据，被告人刘燕也意识到自己的错误，表示会好好改造及反思。案件宣判后，被告人刘燕服判，没有提起上诉，被害人家属也表示服判。

根据调查了解，被害人高某某自小在安徽老家由爷爷、奶奶抚养，而被告人刘燕夫妇则带女儿在潮州市潮安区打工生活，案发前两三个月刚将被害人高某某带到潮州市潮安区上学。由于外出打工的父母与留守儿童处于长时间分离状况，双方重新一起生活时，无论是在情感上还是在生活习惯上均容易出现分歧；而且外省打工者这一特定群体受教育程度较低，忙于生计，缺乏如何教育子女成长的正确方法，这一现实情况可能也是导致本案发生的一大因素所在。本案的发生为社会敲响警钟，社会应给予留守儿童的生存、教育情况更多关注，留守儿童更是迫切需要父母及社会给予耐心、细心、温心的教育和包容。

四、霍霖祯强奸案

（一）基本案情

2006年7月至2011年4月间，被告人霍霖祯以虚假身份通过网络聊天、手机短信息聊天等方式，获取未成年在校女学生或者其他女网友的真实身份资料后，以公开经其引诱进行的有淫秽内容聊天的记录、利用被害人头像合成的裸体照片等方式相威胁，或者以帮助安排工作、教绘画为由，逼迫、诱骗被害人见面，先后在上海市，江苏省南京市，安徽省合肥市、滁州市、天长市、明光市、全椒县、肥西县、定远县、来安县等地的宾馆、旅店房间或者霍霖祯经营的儒林画院，共对25名被害人实施了强奸犯罪，强奸既遂16人，其中聋哑残疾人3人、幼女5人；强奸未遂3人；犯罪预备6人，其中幼女2人。

（二）裁判结果

安徽省滁州市中级人民法院经审理认为，被告人霍霖祯采用暴力、胁迫手段强奸妇女、奸淫幼女的行为已构成强奸罪。霍霖祯通过网上聊天等方式获取被害人真实身份资料，以公开聊天内容、合成的被害人裸体照片等方式胁迫被害人与其见面后，强奸妇女、奸淫幼女多人，并采用拍摄强奸过程等方式继续胁迫部分被害人，还采用其他方式实施强奸犯罪，且主要针对未成年在校学生实施犯罪，情节极其恶劣，后果严重，社会危害性极大，应依法惩处。虽然霍霖祯部分犯罪系未遂，部分犯罪处于预备阶段，亦不足以对其从轻处罚。依照刑法有关规定，认定被告人霍霖祯犯强奸罪，判处死刑，剥夺政治权利终身。宣判后，霍霖祯不服，提出上诉。安徽省高级人民法院于2013年6月13日作出裁定驳回上诉、维持原判。最高人民法院于2014年7月16日作出判决核准安徽省高级人民法院以强奸罪判处被告人霍霖祯死刑，剥夺政治权利终身的刑事裁定。滁州市中级人民法院依法对霍霖祯执行了死刑。

（三）典型意义

随着网络技术的迅速发展，各种利用网络实施犯罪的行为也随之而生。本案就是一起利用网络强奸多名妇女、奸淫多名幼女的恶性案件，社会危害性极大，应当引起我们足够的重视。

本案被告人霍霖祯利用网络虚拟的世界，以及未成年女学生、女青年往往涉世不深的弱点，引诱其陷入早已设下的圈套；又利用被害女学生、女青年害怕聊天记录、裸体照片被公开的心理，胁迫提出各种要求，令被害人言听计从，不敢反抗、不能反抗。本案中，霍霖祯对25名被害人实施强奸犯罪，仅有2名被害人报警，这也给公安机关及时、有效地打击此类犯罪带来了困难，客观上也使得更多的被害人遭受性侵害。

虽然霍霖祯被绳之以法，但其行为给25名被害人，特别是给多名未成年少女和幼女造成了无法弥补的心理和身体双重伤害，给她们的家庭也带来了无尽的痛苦。她们的遭遇令人同情，也发人深思。通过本案警示公众，特别是身心尚未成熟的未成年女学生：网络交友定谨慎，虚拟世界伪或真。屏幕背后淫贼狂，看似甜蜜实险恶。遇到胁迫莫要慌，家人朋友来帮忙。擦亮双眼来辨分，豺狼虎豹立遁形。

五、靳学勇故意杀人案

（一）基本案情

2013年5月，被告人靳学勇通过网上QQ聊天认识了被害人吴某某（女，殁年12岁），靳学勇在聊天中谎称自己叫“王钢”。同年6月23日，吴某某在QQ聊天中说自己不想上学了，到宁夏石嘴山市大武口区找工作，靳学勇便让其到大武口锦林小区来找自己。当日15时许，靳学勇自称是“王钢”的叔叔，在大武口锦林一区门口接上吴某某。二人在锦林二区6号楼前的树林里聊天时，靳学勇认为吴某某辱骂自己，便掐住吴某某的脖子并拧动，致其失去反抗能力。后又将吴某某抱至锦林二区6号楼2单元102号地下室，见其已没有呼吸，用文具小刀将吴某某尸体肢解后运至锦林小区附近的泄洪沟掩埋。2013年7月11日，公安民警将靳学勇抓获。经法医鉴定，吴某某系被扼颈致机械性窒息死亡，死后被分尸。

（二）裁判结果

宁夏回族自治区石嘴山市中级人民法院经审理认为，被告人靳学勇因琐事对被害人产生不满，采用扼颈的手段致被害人死亡，其行为已构成故意杀人罪。公诉机关指控被告人靳学勇犯故意杀人罪事实清楚，证据确实、充分，指控罪名成立。被告人靳学勇将被害人杀害后又将被害人尸体进行肢解掩埋，其犯罪手段极其残忍，犯罪情节极其恶劣，社会危害性极大，应依法予以严惩，且其有犯罪前科，应酌情从重处罚。被告人靳学勇的犯罪行为给附带民事诉讼原告人吴海亮、海英英造成物质损失，依法应予赔偿。二附带民事诉讼原告人的诉讼请求中，其中有证据证实的丧葬费为6270元，符合法律规定，予以支持；其他诉讼请求不符合法律规定，不予支持。因被告人靳学勇的亲属自愿赔偿被害人近亲属20000元，符合法律规定，应予以支持。依照刑法等有关规定，判决被告人靳学勇犯故意杀人罪，判处死刑，剥夺政治权利终身；被告人靳学勇赔偿附带民事诉讼原告人吴海亮、海英英物质损失20000 元；驳回附带民事诉讼原告人吴海亮、海英英的其他诉讼请求；作案工具刀刃残片予以没收。宣判后，被告人靳学勇不服，提出上诉。

宁夏回族自治区高级人民法院经依法开庭审理，裁定驳回上诉，维持原判，并依法报最高人民法院核准。最高人民法院经复核，核准宁夏回族自治区高级人民法院维持第一审以故意杀人罪判处被告人靳学勇死刑，剥夺政治权利终身的刑事裁定。

（三）典型意义

本案是一起通过网络聊天诱骗未成年少女并将其杀害的案件。被害人吴某某一家从宁夏南部山区移民到宁夏银川市，因为父母忙于生计，又没有文化，平时与吴某某沟通较少。吴某某因年纪小，自控能力差，迷恋上了QQ聊天，并通过QQ聊天认识了自称是“王钢”叔叔的被告人靳学勇，在QQ聊天中倾诉自己不想上学，想找工作，被靳学勇诱骗到大武口区找工作，最终被被告人残忍杀害。被告人犯罪性质恶劣，手段残忍，情节、后果严重。判处被告人靳学勇死刑，剥夺政治权利终身，量刑适当。

当今QQ聊天已成为大部分年轻人生活的一部分，它拉近了人与人之间的时空距离，丰富了人们的业余文化生活。但是，在给人们生产生活带来便利的同时，也给不法之徒实施犯罪带来了可乘之机。一些人专门在网上利用QQ寻找侵害对象实施不法行为，其中，既有利用网络进行诈骗犯罪的，也有利用网络进行暴力犯罪的。涉世未深的未成年人，尤其容易被犯罪分子通过QQ等通讯方式编造的谎言所欺骗、蒙蔽。本案被告人靳学勇通过QQ结识年仅12岁的吴某某，取得吴某某轻信后，即与吴某某相约见面，最后以给吴某某找工作为由，将吴某某诱骗至其居住的小区并将吴某某杀害。该案的发生提醒广大的青少年，不能轻信通过网络结识陌生人，不能在网络上透漏个人信息，更不能孤身和网友见面，以免造成人身危险。同时，也提醒未成年人的父母，要引导和教育未成年人子女正确利用网络，净化网络朋友圈，关注未成年人子女的社交圈，时刻注意防患于未然，确保未成年人的人身安全。

六、邵建非法拘禁、强奸案

（一）基本案件

被告人邵建通过网络聊天认识被害人张某某，2013年6月25日，被告人邵建约见张某某，并在吉林省榆三公路道南加油站附近，强行将被害人张某某（女，17岁）拽上一辆捷达出租车前往吉林省榆树市，在一家旅店内非法拘禁张某某至6月26日。2013年6月26日，邵建又将张某某带至黑龙江省哈尔滨市，在哈尔滨市南岗区汉广街与汉阳街交口处的北往旅店内，非法拘禁张某某至6月28日。2013年6月25日，邵建将张某某强行带至吉林省榆树市后，在一家旅店内多次强行与张某某发生性行为，6月26日邵建将张某某强行带至哈尔滨市后，在哈尔滨市南岗区汉广街与汉阳街交口处的北往旅店内，多次强行与张某某发生性关系。

（二）裁判结果

黑龙江省哈尔滨市南岗区人民法院经审理认为，被告人邵建非法拘禁他人并多次以暴力、胁迫手段强奸妇女，其行为已构成非法拘禁罪、强奸罪。公诉机关指控的罪名成立，应予以惩处。依照刑法有关规定，判决被告人邵建犯强奸罪，判处有期徒刑九年，剥夺政治权利一年；犯非法拘禁罪，判处有期徒刑二年；数罪并罚，决定执行有期徒刑十年，剥夺政治权利一年。宣判后，原审被告人邵建不服，以原审判决量刑过重为由，提出上诉。

经二审审理查明的事实、证据与一审相一致。原审判决认定上诉人（原审被告人）邵建犯强奸罪、非法拘禁罪的事实清楚，证据充分，定罪准确，诉讼程序合法。原审法院对邵建所犯强奸罪、非法拘禁罪的量刑规范，且在刑罚幅度之内，并无不当。上诉人邵建的上诉理由无法律依据，不予支持。在二审审理过程中，邵建申请撤回上诉。邵建申请撤回上诉，符合法律规定的撤诉条件，依据《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法〉的解释》第三百零五条、第三百零八条之规定，裁定准许上诉人（原审被告人）邵建撤回上诉。

（三）典型意义

本案是一起利用网络聊天，欺骗被害人与其见面、胁迫并拘禁被害人，并在拘禁期间，对未成年被害人多次强奸的恶性案件。我国刑法第二百三十六条第三款第（一）项规定，强奸妇女、奸淫幼女情节恶劣的，处十年以上有期徒刑、无期徒刑或者死刑。但对“情节恶劣”的认定标准，刑法和司法解释无明文规定，在司法实践中，对长时间对同一妇女非法拘禁并多次实施强奸的，一般认定为“情节恶劣”。本案中虽未按十年以上掌握对被告人的处刑，但考虑本案中被告人长时间在对未成年被害人多次实施强奸行为的性质比较恶劣的具体情况，可以依法从严惩处，故在三年以上十年以下有期徒刑的法定幅度内，“从高”判处被告人邵建有期徒刑九年，量刑适当，充分体现了对未成年被害人等特殊群体的保护。

七、范刚等强迫劳动案

（一）基本案情

被告人范刚、李苑玮是夫妻关系，租用广州市越秀区王圣堂大街十一巷16号201房做手表加工及住宿场所。2013年4月至10月间，被告人范刚与李苑玮以招工为名，先后从中介处招来钟成（案发时16岁）、苏添园（案发时13岁）、周燊（案发时15岁）三名被害人，使用锁门禁止外出的方法强迫三名被害人在该处从事手表组装工作。其间，被告人范刚对被害人钟成、周燊有殴打行为，被告人李苑玮对三名被害人有语言威胁的行为，被告人罗春龙于2013年5月入职后协助被告人范刚看管三名被害人。2013年10月20日，经被害人报警，公安人员到场解救了三名被害人，并将被告人范刚、李苑玮、罗春龙抓获归案。经法医鉴定，被害人钟成和周燊的头部、颈部、臂部受伤，损伤程度属轻微伤。

（二）裁判结果

广东省广州市越秀区人民法院经审理认为，被告人范刚、李苑玮、罗春龙以暴力、胁迫和限制人身自由的方法强迫未成年人劳动，其行为均侵犯了他人的人身权利，共同构成强迫劳动罪，情节严重。被告人范刚在共同犯罪中起主要作用，应认定为主犯；被告人李苑玮、罗春龙在共同犯罪中起次要或辅助作用，应认定为从犯，依法应当从轻处罚。被告人范刚、李苑玮自愿认罪，能如实供述自己的罪行，依法可以从轻处罚。依照刑法有关规定，认定被告人范刚犯强迫劳动罪，判处有期徒刑三年，并处罚金10000元；被告人李苑玮犯强迫劳动罪，判处有期徒刑十个月，并处罚金5000元；被告人罗春龙犯强迫劳动罪，判处有期徒刑七个月，并处罚金1000元。宣判后，没有上诉、抗诉。判决已发生法律效力。

（三）典型意义

本案是一起典型的以限制人身自由的方法强迫未成年人劳动的案件。三名被害人在案发时均未成年，最大的16周岁、最小的年仅13周岁。未成年人由于其心智发育尚未成熟，自我保护的能力较弱。被告人范刚等人专门招收未成年人进行强迫劳动，更突显了其行为的强迫性和违法性。在目前侵犯未成年人权益的案件频频发生的现状下，国家对未成年人的保护给予了高度重视。最高人民法院《〈刑法修正案（八）〉条文及配套司法解释理解与适用》规定，强迫劳动罪的“情节严重”包括强迫未成年人劳动的情形，不论人数多少。故本案符合“情节严重”的情形，对主犯应在3年以上量刑。本案的三名未成年被害人是因外出贪玩或外出打工而遇险，本案警示家长们一定要特别注意未成年子女在外的人身安全，最好不要让未成年子女独自外出打工。

八、刘琴等故意伤害案

（一）基本案情

被告人刘琴于2010年左右通过互联网结识倪某甲，二人产生婚外恋情，刘琴要求倪某甲离婚并与自己结婚，遭倪的拒绝，刘琴心生怨恨。2011年5月，刘琴在倪某甲经营的干洗店内与倪的妻子彭某某发生争吵，被倪某甲当场殴打，刘琴为此产生报复之念。2012年3月23日，刘琴在互联网QQ空间“漂流瓶”上发布“谁帮我毁掉一个女人的容貌”的信息，寻人报复彭某某。陈某某（同案被告人，已判刑）见此信息，回复刘琴表示愿意帮忙，刘琴遂与陈某某通过互联网联系商议报复之事，刘琴许诺事成之后给付陈某某1至2万元好处费。同年6月，陈某某从外省来到江西省鹰潭市与刘琴会面，二人再次商议认为报复成年人费用大，转而决定报复倪某甲之子倪某乙(被害人，时年8岁)，并决定用硫酸搞瞎倪某乙的眼睛。之后，刘琴出钱，陈某某买来硫酸。刘琴多次带陈某某到江西省余江县倪某甲家和江西省南昌市倪某甲经营的干洗店进行踩点、指认，经跟踪获取了倪某甲租住处的具体位置。同年7月7日上午，刘琴在倪某甲经营的干洗店附近观察倪某甲夫妇的举动，陈某某则携带硫酸来到南昌市耶稣堂绳金塔104号304室倪某甲租住处外等候，伺机作案。当日12时许，陈某某通过刘琴发来的手机短信得知倪某甲夫妇在干洗店后，便进到倪某甲租住房，将所带的一玻璃瓶硫酸泼向倪某乙的面部及身上，致倪某乙全身大面积烧伤，构成重伤甲级，二级伤残。

（二）裁判结果

江西省南昌市中级人民法院经审理认为，被告人刘琴、陈某某用硫酸毁人容貌，致人重伤甲级，伤残二级，其行为均已构成故意伤害罪。刘琴提起犯意，雇凶报复无辜儿童，积极追求犯罪结果发生，二被告人共同预谋、策划犯罪，以特别残忍手段致人重伤造成严重残疾，对二被告人不宜区分主从犯。但在共同犯罪中刘琴的地位、作用和主观恶性更大，应依法严惩。依照刑法的有关规定，认定被告人刘琴犯故意伤害罪，判处死刑，剥夺政治权利终身。宣判后，刘琴提出上诉。江西省高级人民法院经依法开庭审理，认为上诉人刘琴雇佣陈某某采用泼硫酸的手段故意伤害他人，致被害人重伤，其二人行为均已构成故意伤害罪。刘琴因与他人的感情纠纷，雇凶伤害无辜儿童，二人的犯罪动机卑劣，作案手段特别残忍，情节特别恶劣，后果特别严重，均系主犯，应依法予以惩处。刘琴在本案中的地位、作用更大，主观恶性更深。作出驳回上诉，维持原判的刑事附带民事判决，并依法报请最高人民法院核准。最高人民法院经复核认为，被告人刘琴为报复泄愤，竟雇佣他人采用泼硫酸的方式故意伤害无辜儿童身体并致被害人重伤，其行为已构成故意伤害罪。在共同犯罪中，刘琴通过互联网发布雇人行凶信息、出资购买硫酸、踩点并指认被害人，系罪责最为严重的主犯。刘琴犯罪手段特别残忍，情节特别恶劣，后果及所犯罪行极其严重，应依法惩处，依法核准刘琴死刑。刘琴已被执行死刑。

（三）典型意义

本案是一起残害无辜儿童的故意伤害案，惨案的发生是由无辜儿童的父亲倪某甲与被告人刘琴的婚外恋而引发。被告人刘琴因丈夫长期在外打工，与其聚少离多，夫妻感情名存实亡，在家带小孩的刘琴闲来无聊时便爱上网与人聊天，于是结识了有家室和一双儿女的倪某甲，二人很快产生婚外恋。其间，刘琴因无工作和经济来源，生活十分困难，倪某甲便时常拿些钱款给刘琴，二人长期保持不正常的关系。刘琴在生下一对双胞胎男孩后，要求倪某甲离婚与其结婚，但遭到并不想与其生活的倪某甲拒绝，并在刘琴与彭某某发生争吵时，倪某甲当妻子的面殴打刘琴，刘琴便产生报复之念，她要报复彭某某，报复倪某甲的儿子，让倪某甲夫妇永远难受。于是，刘琴通过互联网雇到了凶手陈某某，用泼硫酸的方式烧伤时年8岁的倪某乙面容和身体，致其容貌被废，右眼摘除，面目全非，疼痛难忍，生不如死。

此案警示公众：一旦走进婚姻的殿堂，就要树立正确的婚姻观，对家人和家庭负责，并正确处理好夫妻关系和矛盾。婚外恋可谓“毒树之果”，它的恶果不仅伤及自己，还可能伤及家人。网络世界纷繁复杂，网络可谓“双刃之剑”，既有其利的一面，也有其弊的一面，要把握好自己，正确利用网络。

Typical Cases of People's Courts Punishing Violations of the Legal Rights and Interests of Minors in accordance with the Law

1、 Wang Xianhua's rape case

（1） Basic facts of the case

The defendant Wang Xianhua and Liu Yongcui (the mother of the victim) cohabited, and both parties had a queen named Liang, the daughter of Liu Yongcui's ex husband (born in 2007), who lived together. On January 18, 2014, after Wang was discharged from the hospital with a leg burn, Liu Yongcui returned home. She was afraid that Liang would step onto Wang's burn wound while sleeping at night, so she asked Liang to sleep with the defendant Wang Xianhua in another bedroom. That night, the defendant Wang Xianhua raped Liang.

（2） Judgment results

After trial, the People's Court of Zhenba County, Shaanxi Province found that the defendant Wang Xianhua forcibly engaged in sexual intercourse with a young girl under the age of fourteen, and his behavior constituted the crime of rape, which should be punished severely. However, if he voluntarily confessed in court, he may be given a lighter sentence at his discretion. According to the relevant provisions of China's criminal law, the defendant Wang Xianhua was found guilty of rape and sentenced to six years in prison. After the verdict was pronounced, the defendant did not appeal, and the public prosecution did not raise a protest. The verdict has become legally effective.

（3） Typical significance

This case is a case of sexual assault on a minor stepchild. With the development of society, cases of sexual assault on underage stepchildren in remarried families have increasingly become a prominent category of sexual assault cases. Especially in the remote and backward western mountainous areas, with poor living habits and economic conditions, parents who remarry have no time to take into account the personal protective awareness and common sense that minors should have during their growth, ultimately resulting in remarried spouses being able to even harm minors for a long time, causing lifelong wounds that are difficult to heal for minors. This case warns the public that it is necessary to strengthen the awareness and common sense of self-protection among women and children, and jointly prevent and control the occurrence of such malignant cases.

2、 Zeng Bing's intentional injury case

（1） Basic facts of the case

In May 2012, the defendant Zeng Bing was introduced to her current husband Xu, and subsequently lived with Xu and his daughter Xiaojia (who was less than 3 years old at the time of the crime), who had given birth to Xu's ex-wife. To prevent Xu from contacting his ex-wife, Zeng Bing often went berserk, and after getting pregnant, he often harshly scolded non biological Xiaojia, constantly beating and scolding her.

At 5 pm on January 1, 2013, Zeng Bing called Xiaojia to take a shower at home, but Xiaojia cried and refused. In a fit of anger, Zeng Bing hit and pushed Xiaojia's face and neck with his hand, and Xiaojia fell to the ground, causing head injury. At first, Zeng Bing didn't pay attention, but then Xiaojia began to lose consciousness, accompanied by vomiting and coma symptoms. Zeng Bing summoned his relatives to take Xiaojia to the hospital for rescue, but due to the severity of the injury, Xiaojia died on January 7th. According to forensic identification, the cause of Xiaojia's death was severe head injury, left frontal top subdural hematoma with brain hernia formation, and brainstem failure.

At around 10:00 pm on the night Xiaojia was beaten, the public security organs arrested Zeng Bing in the hospital. Due to Zeng Bing being pregnant at the time, from January 2, 2013 to June 30, 2014, the public security organs and procuratorial organs respectively took bail pending trial measures against him. On July 1, 2014, Zeng Bing was approved for arrest. On July 7 of the same year, the procuratorial organ filed a public prosecution with the first instance court.

（2） Judgment results

After a trial in court, the People's Court of Qingxin District, Qingyuan City, Guangdong Province sentenced the defendant Zeng Bing to fourteen years and three months in prison for the crime of intentional injury. After the first instance verdict was pronounced, Zeng Bing filed an appeal claiming that the sentence was too heavy. He believed that: 1. The original judgment found that the appellant committed the crime of intentional injury as a mistake in the application of law, and that his behavior was negligent and caused death. The appellant and the victim had been taking good care of him during their living together. At the time of the incident, the appellant only hit the victim a few times for the purpose of education. The child fell and died not as expected, and in reality, many cases of parental education leading to the death of a child are convicted and punished based on negligence. 2. The victim's father has expressed understanding to the appellant. 3. The original judgment did not fully consider his repentant attitude and the situation of his parents being old and his son being young. Request the second instance court to revise the judgment.

After the second instance, the Qingyuan Intermediate People's Court found out that although the appellant Zeng Bing did not actively pursue the consequences of the victim's death after being sent to the hospital for rescue after Xiaojia fell into a coma, the manner and location of the beating, as well as the injury consequences of the left occipital bone comminuted fracture of the victim's head, skull sutures and bone fissures, and some brain tissues showing dissolved changes, can be seen from the strength of the appellant in implementing the beating, The subjective indulgence towards harmful consequences should be considered as indirect intent, therefore the first instance determination constitutes the crime of intentional injury. Regarding Zeng Bing's appeal for positive compensation, it was found to be true. Considering that the case occurred between family members and that the appellant actively sent the victim to medical treatment after the incident, he stayed in the hospital and did not escape. Therefore, Zeng Bing was sentenced to twelve years in prison.

（3） Typical significance

Every year, there is almost no interruption in reports of children being killed by their parents or family members. Children are the flesh and blood of their parents and the hope of their families. Why do some parents have the heart to repeatedly use their hands and do things that harm their children as they grow up? Because many people still believe that it is a natural thing for parents to beat and scold their children, and the ancient motto that many parents in our country believe in is "no talent without beating" and "filial piety comes from under a stick".

The incorrect concept of discipline is one of the main reasons for violence against children. In addition, difficulties in life, high work pressure, lack of conditions to raise children without marriage, physical and intellectual disabilities or disabilities of children, preference for sons over daughters, bad habits of parents, bad behavior, and mental and psychological abnormalities also contribute to the frequent occurrence of such ethical tragedies.

This type of case reflects that due to the weakness of minors, some parents do not treat their children as independent individuals, but instead treat them as private property or items, and even as a means of venting anger, venting anger, or retaliating.

In a series of laws and regulations such as the Law on the Protection of Minors, it has been explicitly stipulated that guardians "prohibit domestic violence against minors". However, in the absence of a legal perspective that fully incorporates the concept of "parents hitting children", it is difficult for parents to be punished by law unless the child is injured, disabled, or killed; In terms of intervention institutions and measures, they have not yet reached the level of protecting children from domestic violence. Therefore, it is necessary to stand on the standpoint of protecting children, recognize the harm of domestic violence to children, pay special attention and protection to minors, and severely punish criminals who commit violence against minors; At the same time, corresponding intervention measures should be proposed to curb this negative phenomenon and ensure that the dignity of children's lives is not violated.

3、 Liu Yan's Intentional Injury Case

（1） Basic facts of the case

On the afternoon of May 3, 2014, at around 13:00, the defendant Liu Yan questioned Gao in a rented house in a town in Chao'an District, Chaozhou City, Guangdong Province, on suspicion that his child victim, Gao (male, born on October 13, 2008), had stolen money from his family. He became angry because Gao did not admit to stealing property from his family. Liu Yan asked Gao to strip off his clothes and beat him with a belt. Seeing that Gao still refused to admit stealing money from his family, Liu Yan became even more angry and continued to beat Gao's head, back, limbs and other parts with a plastic tube, causing him to be injured to varying degrees in multiple parts of his body until the plastic tube broke. At around 16:00 pm on the same day, Gao suffered from physical discomfort due to being beaten and injured. Liu Yan then sent Gao to the hospital for rescue, and after medical treatment, it was found that Gao had died. The doctor then reported to the public security organs, and Liu Yan was brought back to the hospital for examination by the police on the same day. After investigation, it was found that the cause of death of Gao was consistent with the widespread blunt violent injury on the entire body surface, resulting in traumatic and hemorrhagic shock combined with cardiac contusion and laceration.

（2） Judgment results

The People's Procuratorate of Chao'an District, Chaozhou City, Guangdong Province has filed a public prosecution against the defendant Liu Yan for intentional injury. After trial, the People's Court of Chao'an District, Chaozhou City found that the defendant Liu Yan was angry because she suspected her son of stealing money from the family, and intentionally injured her minor son with weapons, resulting in his death. Her behavior constituted the crime of intentional injury. The prosecution was found guilty of charges. After the defendant Liu Yan returned to the case, he truthfully confessed his criminal facts and obtained the understanding of his family. He was given a lighter punishment in accordance with the law. The defender argues that the defendant Liu Yan's behavior constitutes the crime of causing death through negligence, and the above defense opinions are not well founded and will not be adopted. The defense opinion of the defender that the defendant has a confession and has obtained the understanding of his family, and can be given a lighter punishment, shall be adopted. Based on the defendant's criminal facts, nature, circumstances, and degree of harm to society, and in accordance with relevant provisions of the Criminal Law, the defendant Liu Yan is sentenced to intentional injury and sentenced to ten years in prison. After the judgment was pronounced, there was no appeal or protest, and the judgment has become legally effective.

（3） Typical significance

This case is a typical criminal case involving domestic violence, in which parents, during the process of educating their underage children, become angry due to improper educational methods and engage in uncontrolled beating of the underage children, resulting in their death. According to current criminal policies, crimes caused by the intensification of civil conflicts such as love, marriage, and family disputes are generally subject to lenient punishment as appropriate. Criminal cases involving domestic violence also belong to crimes caused by "love, marriage, and family disputes". Minors, compared to adults, lack the ability to protect themselves and are easily targeted by domestic violence, resulting in more serious consequences of domestic violence; The judiciary may impose strict penalties on defendants who commit violence against minors based on the specific circumstances of the case.

During the trial of this case, although the defendant Liu Yan truthfully confessed his criminal facts, he argued that he did not intentionally harm his son and claimed that he could not intentionally harm his biological son. At that time, he only wanted to educate his son. During the trial, both the presiding judge and the prosecutor shall educate and interpret the law in accordance with the law; When the court pronounced the verdict, the presiding judge once again interpreted it in accordance with the law, informing him of the legal basis for finding him guilty of intentional injury and sentencing him. The defendant Liu Yan also realized her mistake and expressed her willingness to reform and reflect on it. After the verdict of the case was pronounced, the defendant Liu Yan accepted the verdict without filing an appeal, and the victim's family members also expressed their satisfaction with the verdict.

According to the investigation, the victim Gao was raised by his grandfather and grandmother in his hometown of Anhui since childhood, while the defendant Liu Yan and his wife took their daughter to work and live in Chao'an District, Chaozhou City. Just two to three months before the incident, the victim Gao was taken to Chao'an District, Chaozhou City to attend school. Due to the prolonged separation between parents who go out to work and left behind children, it is easy for both parties to diverge emotionally and in terms of lifestyle habits when they live together again; Moreover, the specific group of migrant workers from other provinces has a low level of education and is busy making a living, lacking the correct methods to educate their children's growth. This reality may also be a major factor in the occurrence of this case. The occurrence of this case is a wake-up call for society, which should pay more attention to the survival and education of left behind children. Left behind children urgently need patience, care, warmth, and tolerance from their parents and society.

4、 Huo Linzhen's rape case

（1） Basic facts of the case

From July 2006 to April 2011, the defendant Huo Linzhen obtained the true identity information of underage female students or other female netizens through online chat, mobile SMS chat, and other means of false identity, and threatened to use records of sexually explicit conversations induced by him, naked photos synthesized using the victim's avatar, or to help arrange work or teach painting as a pretext to force Inducing victims to meet up, 25 victims were raped in hotels, hotel rooms, or Confucian painting academies operated by Huo Linzhen in Shanghai, Nanjing, Jiangsu, Hefei, Chuzhou, Tianchang, Mingguang, Quanjiao, Feixi, Dingyuan, Lai'an, and other cities in Anhui, including 3 deaf, mute, disabled, and 5 young girls; 3 attempted rapes; Six people were prepared for crime, including two young girls.

（2） Judgment results

The Intermediate People's Court of Chuzhou City, Anhui Province, after trial, found that the defendant Huo Linzhen's use of violence and coercion to rape women and young girls constituted the crime of rape. Huo Linzhen obtained the true identity information of the victim through online chat and other means, and coerced the victim to meet him through public chat content, synthesized naked photos of the victim, and raped multiple women and young girls. He also continued to coerce some victims through filming the rape process and other means of committing rape crimes, mainly targeting underage school students. The circumstances were extremely harsh and the consequences were serious, The social harm is extremely great and should be punished in accordance with the law. Although some of Huo Linzhen's crimes were attempted and some were in the preparatory stage, it was not enough to impose lenient punishment on him. According to relevant provisions of the Criminal Law, the defendant Huo Linzhen was found guilty of rape and sentenced to death, deprived of political rights for life. After the verdict was pronounced, Huo Linzhen refused and appealed. The Higher People's Court of Anhui Province ruled on June 13, 2013 to reject the appeal and uphold the original judgment. On July 16, 2014, the Supreme People's Court issued a judgment approving the criminal ruling of the Anhui Provincial Higher People's Court sentencing the defendant Huo Linzhen to death for the crime of rape and depriving him of political rights for life. The Intermediate People's Court of Chuzhou City executed Huo Linzhen in accordance with the law.

（3） Typical significance

With the rapid development of network technology, various behaviors of using the internet to commit crimes have also emerged. This case is a malignant case of using the internet to rape multiple women and rape multiple young girls. It poses great social harm and should be given sufficient attention.

The defendant in this case, Huo Linzhen, used the virtual world of the internet and the weakness of underage female students and young women who were often not deeply involved in the world to lure them into a trap that had already been set; By exploiting the fear of chat records and nude photos being made public among the murdered female students and young women, various demands were coerced, making the victims obedient and unable to resist. In this case, Huo Linzhen committed rape against 25 victims, with only 2 victims reporting to the police. This has also brought difficulties for the public security organs to timely and effectively crack down on such crimes, objectively causing more victims to suffer sexual assault.

Although Huo Linzhen was brought to justice, his actions caused irreparable psychological and physical harm to 25 victims, especially multiple underage girls and young girls, and brought endless pain to their families. Their experiences are sympathetic and thought-provoking. Through this case, we warn the public, especially underage female students who are not yet physically and mentally mature: Be cautious when making friends online, and whether the virtual world is fake or real. Behind the screen, the rapist is crazy, seemingly sweet but dangerous. Don't panic when faced with coercion, family and friends come to help. Shine your eyes to distinguish, and the wolf, tiger, and leopard stand in hiding.

5、 Jin Xueyong's Intentional Murder Case

（1） Basic facts of the case

In May 2013, the defendant Jin Xueyong met the victim Wu (female, died at the age of 12) through online QQ chat. During the chat, Jin Xueyong falsely claimed to be called "Wang Gang". On June 23 of the same year, Wu said in a QQ chat that he no longer wanted to go to school and went to Dawukou District, Shizuishan City, Ningxia to find a job. Jin Xueyong asked him to come to Jinlin Community in Dawukou to find him. At around 15:00 that day, Jin Xueyong claimed to be the uncle of "Wang Gang" and met Wu at the entrance of Jinlin District 1 in Dawukou. When the two of them were chatting in the forest in front of Building 6 in Jinlin District 2, Jin Xueyong believed that Wu had insulted him, so he grabbed Wu's neck and twisted it, causing him to lose his resistance. Later, Wu was carried to the basement of Unit 2, Building 6, Jinlin District 2. Seeing that he was no longer breathing, Wu's body was dismembered with a stationery knife and transported to the flood discharge ditch near Jinlin Community for burial. On July 11, 2013, the public security police arrested Jin Xueyong. After forensic identification, Wu was found to have died from mechanical suffocation due to neck strangulation, and was subsequently dismembered.

（2） Judgment results

After trial, the Intermediate People's Court of Shizuishan City, Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region found that the defendant Jin Xueyong was dissatisfied with the victim due to trivial matters and used neck choking to cause the victim's death, which constitutes intentional homicide. The prosecution charged the defendant Jin Xueyong with intentional homicide with clear facts, reliable and sufficient evidence, and the charges were established. The defendant Jin Xueyong killed the victim and then dismembered and buried the body of the victim. His criminal methods were extremely cruel, and the circumstances of the crime were extremely severe, with great social harm. He should be severely punished in accordance with the law, and he had a criminal record and should be given heavier punishment as appropriate. The criminal behavior of the defendant Jin Xueyong caused material losses to the plaintiffs Wu Hailiang and Hai Yingying in the incidental civil litigation, and they should be compensated in accordance with the law. In the plaintiff's claim for incidental civil litigation, there is evidence to prove that the funeral fee is 6270 yuan, which complies with legal provisions and is supported; Other litigation requests do not comply with legal provisions and are not supported. Due to the voluntary compensation of 20000 yuan by the relatives of the defendant Jin Xueyong to the close relatives of the victim, which complies with legal regulations, support should be given. According to relevant provisions such as the Criminal Law, the defendant Jin Xueyong was sentenced to intentional homicide and sentenced to death, deprived of political rights for life; The defendant Jin Xueyong compensated the plaintiff Wu Hailiang and Hai Yingying for material losses of 20000 yuan in the incidental civil lawsuit; Reject other litigation requests from the plaintiffs Wu Hailiang and Hai Yingying in the incidental civil litigation; The blade fragments of the crime tool will be confiscated. After the verdict was pronounced, the defendant Jin Xueyong refused and appealed.

The Higher People's Court of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region has held a court session in accordance with the law, ruled to dismiss the appeal, upheld the original judgment, and submitted it to the Supreme People's Court for approval in accordance with the law. The Supreme People's Court has reviewed and approved the Higher People's Court of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region to uphold the criminal ruling of the first instance, which sentenced the defendant Jin Xueyong to death for intentional homicide and deprived him of political rights for life.

（3） Typical significance

This case is a case of luring and killing underage girls through online chat. The victim Wu's family immigrated from the southern mountainous area of Ningxia to Yinchuan City, Ningxia. Due to their busy parents and lack of education, they had little communication with Wu during their daily lives. Due to his young age and poor self-control, Wu became infatuated with QQ chat and met the defendant Jin Xueyong, who claimed to be Uncle Wang Gang. During the QQ chat, he confided that he didn't want to go to school and wanted to find a job. He was lured by Jin Xueyong to seek a job in Dawukou District, but was ultimately brutally killed by the defendant. The defendant's criminal nature is harsh, the means are cruel, and the circumstances and consequences are serious. The defendant Jin Xueyong was sentenced to death and deprived of political rights for life, with appropriate sentencing.

Nowadays, QQ chatting has become a part of the lives of most young people, narrowing the temporal and spatial distance between people and enriching their leisure cultural life. However, while bringing convenience to people's production and life, it also provides opportunities for criminals to commit crimes. Some people specifically use QQ online to find targets of infringement and commit illegal acts, including those who use the internet to commit fraud crimes and those who use the internet to commit violent crimes. Minors who are not deeply involved in the world are particularly susceptible to being deceived and deceived by lies fabricated by criminals through communication methods such as QQ. The defendant in this case, Jin Xueyong, met Wu, who was only 12 years old, through QQ. After obtaining his trust, he made an appointment with Wu and eventually lured him to his residential area on the grounds of finding a job for Wu, and killed him. The occurrence of this case reminds young people that they should not easily get to know strangers through the internet, cannot disclose personal information online, and cannot meet with netizens alone to avoid personal danger. At the same time, it also reminds parents of minors to guide and educate their children to use the internet correctly, purify their online social circle, pay attention to their social circle, and always take precautions to ensure their personal safety.

6、 Shao Jian's Illegal Detention and Rape Case

（1） Basic case

The defendant Shao Jian met the victim Zhang through online chat. On June 25, 2013, the defendant Shao Jian made an appointment with Zhang and forcibly dragged the victim Zhang (female, 17 years old) into a Jetta taxi to Yushu City, Jilin Province near the South Gas Station on Yushan Road in Jilin Province. Zhang was illegally detained in a hotel until June 26. On June 26, 2013, Shao Jian took Zhang to Harbin, Heilongjiang Province and illegally detained him until June 28 at the north bound hotel at the intersection of Hanguang Street and Hanyang Street in Nangang District, Harbin. On June 25, 2013, Shao Jian forcibly brought Zhang to Yushu City, Jilin Province. He repeatedly had sexual intercourse with Zhang in a hotel. On June 26, Shao Jian forcibly brought Zhang to Harbin City. He then had sexual intercourse with Zhang several times in a hotel located north of the intersection of Hanguang Street and Hanyang Street in Nangang District, Harbin.

（2） Judgment results

After trial, the People's Court of Nangang District, Harbin City, Heilongjiang Province found that the defendant Shao Jian illegally detained others and repeatedly raped women through violence and coercion, which constitutes the crime of illegal detention and rape. The charges charged by the prosecution should be punished if they are found guilty. According to the relevant provisions of the Criminal Law, the defendant Shao Jian was convicted of rape and sentenced to nine years in prison and one year in deprivation of political rights; Commit the crime of illegal detention and be sentenced to two years in prison; Combined punishment for multiple crimes, with the decision to execute a fixed-term imprisonment of ten years and deprivation of political rights for one year. After the verdict was pronounced, the defendant in the original trial, Shao Jian, was not satisfied and appealed on the grounds that the original judgment was too heavy in sentencing.

The facts and evidence identified during the second instance are consistent with those in the first instance. The original judgment determined that the fact that the appellant (defendant) Shao Jian was guilty of rape and illegal detention was clear, the evidence was sufficient, the conviction was accurate, and the litigation procedure was legal. The sentencing standards of the original trial court for the crimes of rape and illegal detention committed by Shao Jian are not inappropriate, and they are within the scope of the punishment. The appellant Shao Jian's appeal grounds have no legal basis and are not supported. During the second instance, Shao Jian applied to withdraw the appeal. Shao Jian's application to withdraw his appeal meets the conditions for withdrawal as stipulated by law. In accordance with the provisions of Articles 305 and 308 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, Shao Jian, the appellant (original defendant), is allowed to withdraw his appeal.

（3） Typical significance

This case is a malicious case of using online chat to deceive the victim into meeting them, coerce and detain the victim, and repeatedly rape the underage victim during the detention period. According to Article 236 (3) (1) of the Criminal Law of China, if the circumstances of raping a woman or raping a young girl are severe, they shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than ten years, life imprisonment, or death. However, there is no explicit provision in the criminal law or judicial interpretation regarding the criteria for determining the severity of the situation. In judicial practice, if a woman is illegally detained for a long time and raped multiple times, it is generally recognized as the severity of the situation. Although the punishment for the defendant in this case has not been mastered for more than ten years, considering the specific situation where the defendant has repeatedly committed rape against underage victims for a long time, it can be severely punished according to law. Therefore, within the statutory range of fixed-term imprisonment of three to ten years, the defendant Shao Jian is sentenced to nine years in prison with appropriate sentencing, This fully reflects the protection of special groups such as underage victims.

7、 Case of Forced Labor by Fan Gang and Others

（1） Basic facts of the case

The defendants Fan Gang and Li Yuanwei are married and have rented Room 201, No. 16, 11th Lane, Wangshengtang Street, Yuexiu District, Guangzhou City as watch processing and accommodation facilities. From April to October 2013, defendants Fan Gang and Li Yuanwei recruited three victims, Zhong Cheng (16 years old at the time of the incident), Su Tianyuan (13 years old at the time of the incident), and Zhou Shen (15 years old at the time of the incident), from the agency under the pretext of recruiting workers. They used the method of locking the door and prohibiting them from going out to force the three victims to engage in watch assembly work there. During this period, the defendant Fan Gang assaulted the victims Zhong Cheng and Zhou Shen, and the defendant Li Yuanwei verbally threatened the three victims. The defendant Luo Chunlong assisted the defendant Fan Gang in taking care of the three victims after joining in May 2013. On October 20, 2013, after the victim reported to the police, public security personnel arrived at the scene to rescue three victims and arrested the defendants Fan Gang, Li Yuanwei, and Luo Chunlong. According to forensic identification, the victims Zhong Cheng and Zhou Shen suffered minor injuries to their head, neck, and arms.

（2） Judgment results

After trial, the People's Court of Yuexiu District, Guangzhou City, Guangdong Province found that the defendants Fan Gang, Li Yuanwei, and Luo Chunlong forced minors to work through violence, coercion, and restriction of personal freedom, all of which violated the personal rights of others and jointly constituted the crime of forced labor, with serious circumstances. The defendant Fan Gang plays a major role in the joint crime and should be identified as the principal offender; The defendants Li Yuanwei and Luo Chunlong played a secondary or auxiliary role in the joint crime and should be recognized as accomplices, and should be given a lighter punishment in accordance with the law. Defendants Fan Gang and Li Yuanwei voluntarily plead guilty and truthfully confess their crimes, and may be given a lighter punishment according to law. According to the relevant provisions of the Criminal Law, the defendant Fan Gang is found to have committed the crime of forced labor and is sentenced to three years in prison, with a fine of 10000 yuan; The defendant Li Yuanwei committed the crime of forced labor and was sentenced to ten months in prison, with a fine of 5000 yuan; The defendant Luo Chunlong committed the crime of forced labor and was sentenced to seven months in prison, with a fine of 1000 yuan. After the verdict was pronounced, there was no appeal or protest. The judgment has taken legal effect.

（3） Typical significance

This case is a typical case of forcing minors to work by restricting their personal freedom. The three victims were all under age at the time of the crime, with the oldest being 16 years old and the youngest being only 13 years old. Minors have weaker self-protection abilities due to their immature mental development. The defendant Fan Gang and others specifically recruited minors for forced labor, highlighting the coercive and illegal nature of their behavior. In the current situation of frequent cases of infringing on the rights and interests of minors, the state has attached great importance to the protection of minors. The Supreme People's Court's "Interpretation and Application of the Articles and Supporting Judicial Interpretations of the Criminal Law Amendment (8)" stipulates that the "serious circumstances" of the crime of forced labor include situations where minors are forced to work, regardless of the number of people involved. Therefore, this case is in line with the situation of "serious circumstances", and the principal offender should be sentenced to at least 3 years. The three underage victims in this case were in danger due to going out for fun or working outside. This case warns parents to pay special attention to the personal safety of their underage children while they are away, and it is best not to let them go out to work alone.

8、 Liu Qin and others' intentional injury case

（1） Basic facts of the case

The defendant Liu Qin got to know Ni Moujia through the internet around 2010, and the two had an extramarital affair. Liu Qin requested Ni Moujia to divorce and marry him, but Ni refused. Liu Qin felt resentment. In May 2011, Liu Qin had an argument with Ni's wife Peng at a dry cleaning shop operated by Ni Moujia, and was beaten on the spot by Ni Moujia. Liu Qin had a desire for revenge for this. On March 23, 2012, Liu Qin posted a message on the internet QQ space "Drifting Bottle" titled "Who helped me destroy a woman's appearance", seeking revenge against Peng. Chen (co defendant, sentenced) received this message and replied to Liu Qin that he was willing to help. Liu Qin then contacted Chen through the internet to discuss retaliation, and Liu Qin promised to pay Chen a benefit fee of 10000 to 20000 yuan after the matter was resolved. In June of the same year, Chen came from another province to Yingtan City, Jiangxi Province to meet with Liu Qin. The two of them once again discussed the cost of retaliating against adults, and decided to retaliate against Ni Moyi, the son of Ni Mojia (the victim, who was 8 years old at the time). They also decided to blind Ni Moyi with sulfuric acid. Afterwards, Liu Qin paid and Chen bought sulfuric acid. Liu Qin repeatedly took Chen to the dry cleaning shop operated by Ni Moujia in Yujiang County, Jiangxi Province and Ni Moujia in Nanchang City, Jiangxi Province for inspection and identification. After tracking, he obtained the specific location of Ni Moujia's rented residence. On the morning of July 7th of the same year, Liu Qin observed the actions of Ni and his wife near the dry cleaning shop operated by Ni Moujia. Chen Moujia brought sulfuric acid to wait outside Ni Moujia's rented place at Room 304, No. 104 Shengjin Tower, Jesus Church, Nanchang, waiting for the opportunity to commit the crime. At around 12:00 on the same day, Chen learned through a mobile phone message sent by Liu Qin that Ni and his wife were in a dry cleaning shop. He then went to Ni's rented house and poured a glass bottle of sulfuric acid he had brought onto Ni's face and body, causing extensive burns to Ni's entire body, forming a serious injury of Grade A and Grade II disability.

（2） Judgment results

After trial, the Intermediate People's Court of Nanchang City, Jiangxi Province found that the defendants Liu Qin and Chen used sulfuric acid to destroy a person's appearance, causing serious injury of Class A and disability of Class II, and their actions constituted the crime of intentional injury. Liu Qin raised a criminal intention, hired criminals to retaliate against innocent children, and actively pursued the consequences of the crime. The two defendants jointly planned and planned the crime, causing serious injuries and serious disabilities through particularly cruel means. It is not appropriate to distinguish between the main and accessory offenders for the two defendants. However, Liu Qin's position, role, and subjective malignancy are greater in joint crimes and should be severely punished in accordance with the law. According to the relevant provisions of the Criminal Law, the defendant Liu Qin was found guilty of intentional injury and sentenced to death, deprived of political rights for life. After the verdict was pronounced, Liu Qin appealed. The Higher People's Court of Jiangxi Province held a court hearing in accordance with the law and found that the appellant Liu Qin hired Chen to intentionally harm others by pouring sulfuric acid, causing serious injury to the victim. Both of their actions constituted the crime of intentional injury. Liu Qin, due to emotional disputes with others, hired criminals to harm innocent children. Their criminal motives were despicable, their methods of committing the crime were particularly cruel, the circumstances were particularly severe, and the consequences were particularly serious. Both were the main offenders and should be punished in accordance with the law. Liu Qin's position and role in this case are greater, and his subjective malignancy is deeper. Make a rejection appeal, uphold the original criminal and civil judgment, and submit it to the Supreme People's Court for approval in accordance with the law. The Supreme People's Court has reviewed and found that the defendant Liu Qin, in order to retaliate and vent his anger, hired someone else to intentionally harm the innocent child's body by pouring sulfuric acid, causing serious injury to the victim. His behavior constitutes the crime of intentional injury. In the joint crime, Liu Qin is the most severely responsible principal offender for publishing information about hiring people to commit crimes, investing in purchasing sulfuric acid, and identifying and identifying victims through the internet. Liu Qin's criminal methods are particularly cruel, the circumstances are particularly severe, and the consequences and crimes committed are extremely serious. He should be punished according to law and his death penalty should be approved according to law. Liu Qin has been executed.

（3） Typical significance

This case is a deliberate injury case that brutalizes an innocent child. The tragedy occurred due to the extramarital affair between the innocent child's father Ni Moujia and the defendant Liu Qin. The defendant Liu Qin, whose husband has been working outside for a long time and has been together and separated from each other for a long time, has a real relationship between the couple. Liu Qin, who takes care of children at home, likes to chat with others online when he is bored. Therefore, he met Ni Moujia, who has a family and a pair of children. The two quickly developed an extramarital relationship. During this time, Liu Qin had no job or financial resources, making life very difficult. Ni Moujia often gave Liu Qin some money, and the two maintained an abnormal relationship for a long time. After giving birth to a pair of twin boys, Liu Qin requested a divorce from Ni Moujia and her marriage, but Ni Moujia, who did not want to live with him, refused. When Liu Qin had an argument with Peng Moujia, Ni Moujia beat Liu Qin in front of his wife, and Liu Qin felt a desire for revenge. She wanted to retaliate against Peng Moujia and Ni Moujia's son, making the Ni Moujia couple forever uncomfortable. So, Liu Qin hired the killer Chen Moumou through the internet and burned Ni Mouyi, who was then 8 years old, with sulfuric acid, causing his appearance to be disfigured, his right eye to be removed, his face completely changed, and the pain was unbearable, making life more difficult than death.

This case warns the public: once entering the palace of marriage, it is necessary to establish a correct view of marriage, be responsible for family and family, and handle marital relationships and conflicts correctly. Extramarital love can be described as the "fruit of a poisonous tree", and its negative consequences not only harm oneself, but may also harm family members. The online world is complex and diverse, and the internet can be described as a "double-edged sword". It has both advantages and disadvantages. It is important to grasp oneself and make proper use of the internet.