An Exploration of the Legal Issue of the Source of the Duty to Act in Omission Crimes within Marital Relationships

Abstract

This template explains and demonstrates how to prepare your camera-ready paper for Trans Tech Publications. The best is to read these instructions and follow the outline of this text. Please make the page settings of your word processor to A4 format (21 x 29,7 cm or 8 x 11 inches); with the margins: bottom 1.5 cm (0.59 in) and top 2.5 cm (0.98 in), right/left margins must be 2 cm (0.78 in). This template explains and demonstrates how to prepare your camera-ready paper for Trans Tech Publications. The best is to read these instructions and follow the outline of this text. Please make the page settings of your word processor to A4 format (21 x 29,7 cm or 8 x 11 inches); with the margins: bottom 1.5 cm (0.59 in) and top 2.5 cm (0.98 in), right/left margins must be 2 cm (0.78 in). With societal development, interpersonal relationships have trended towards indifference and alienation, a phenomenon also observable within the once most intimate marital relationship. In reality, cases are common where, due to disputes over trivial matters, one spouse commits suicide and the other fails to provide assistance, resulting in death. In such scenarios, scholarly opinions diverge on whether the non-assisting spouse commits a crime. In Chinese judicial practice, such conduct is mostly adjudicated as omission-based intentional homicide, with a minority of cases resulting in acquittal. The fundamental reason lies in the absence of explicit legal provisions in Chinese law regarding the duty of rescue between spouses. When adjudicating such cases, judges hold differing views on the duty to act in omission crimes, leading to inconsistent judgments for similar cases.