Judge's eyes clearly abuse the right of visuality to show jurisprudence and reason compatibility to show judicial prudence and goodwill

"The verdict finally came down," Xue Bao's mother clenched the judgment tightly, shed tears of excitement. She said: "I just want to tell the child that my mother did not do something wrong, and now I got the results of the court's fair handling, thank you for the court!" Recently, the Yanji Court's administrative court tried the administrative penalty case in accordance with the law. Thanks to the judge excitedly after the verdict.

Retrospective

Xue Bao's father and Xue Baoma divorced due to their personalities. The two sides agreed that the marriage female Xue Xiaobao was raised by her mother Xue Bao's mother and agreed to the visits of Xue Bao's father. Later, Dad Xue Bao visited the child and was rejected many times, and went to the court to apply for forced execution. During the implementation, Xue Xiaobao repeatedly expressed to the judge that he did not want to meet Xue Bao's father. Because he could not enforce the enforcement of people's physical attributes, it was executed.

Xue Bao's father, who could not be visited, found Xue Xiaobao again in March 2022. At the entrance of Xue Xiaobao's primary school, while the student queued out of school and the teacher sorted out the team, he stepped forward and forcibly took Xue Xiaobao. Xue Xiaobao was frightened and cried. Xue Bao's mother chased Xue Bao's father and stopped pulling, and Xue Bao's father fell to the ground. Later, Xue Bao dad called the police and said that he had been beaten and submitted a full -time mobile video, asking the public security organs to deal with and expressed disagreement. Later, the public security organs made an administrative penalty decision and gave Xue Bao Ma a fine of 500 yuan. Xue Bao's father believed that the punishment was too light and sued the penalty decision of the public security organs to the Yanji Court. Xue Baoma was the third person in the case.

After trial, the court held that it was notolate whether the behavior of violations of public security management and whether it should be punished by administrative penalties. Although Xue Bao's mother implemented a pulling behavior on Xue Bao's father, the reason was the contradiction caused by the exercise problem of the right to visit after the divorce of the husband and wife. The significance of the right to visuality is to ensure that the party who does not directly raise the child after the divorce can be reunited with the children regularly, which is conducive to the emotional damage caused by the disintegration of the family to the parents and children. The fundamental purpose is to ensure the healthy growth of minor children.

In this case, Xue Bao's father took away Xue Xiaobao and caused his fear of crying. His parents had a dispute at the campus door, which may have a adverse effect on Xue Xiaobao's physical and mental health. According to the fact that the previous exploration right was forced to execute, Xue Bao's father should clearly understand Xue Xiaobao's inner real thoughts, and should also clearly take away the consequences of Xue Xiaobao's behavior. Parents cannot consider the actual feelings of their children in order to achieve their so -called rights. In view of this, it should be determined that Xue Bao's improper exercise of the right to explore is the root cause of the dispute. Xue Bao's father was in fault. Xue Bao's behavior was to stop his child away. Without the intention of beating others, he did not exceed the necessary limit. Xue Bao's behavior is commonplace and within a reasonable and appropriate range, it is not a violation of public security management. Therefore, the court's decision to revoke the decision of administrative punishment. Xue Bao's father was dissatisfied and appealed to the court of second instance. The court of the second instance rejected Xue Bao's appeal and maintained the original sentence. After the verdict came into effect, Xue Bao's mother shed tears excitedly, and the opening scene appeared.

Judge

In this case, the incident caused by family contradictions is different from other public security cases. Family relationships are often the most difficult to solve and need to spend a lot of energy to reconcile. Rights and obligations are two sides, there is no obligation to have no rights, nor does it have no obligation rights. Each of us has parents and will eventually become parents. Parents who have not directly raised their children must also fulfill their obligations that are conducive to their children's physical and mental health when they exercise the right to visit. The right to visit is not a "tool" for fighting. In the future, both parents should strengthen communication, shelve disputes, and keep restraint. Proper treatment methods are adopted according to the age stage and mental condition of their children to jointly guard the personal safety and mental health of their children.

Family is the smallest unit of society. Family harmony can society be harmonious. When dealing with family disputes, you need to think carefully and in discharge. Punishment is not the purpose. It is the purpose to solve the problem. The application of law is not a pile of facts and the use of law mechanics. It should be based on the trial function, comprehensively all factors, and diversify disputes to achieve the unity of legal effects and social effects. This is also the deserved meaning of building a harmonious society.

Law link

The first explanation of the "Public Security Organ Implementation of the Public Security Management Punishment Law of the People's Republic of China" (2) Article 1 to prevent illegal infringement in order to avoid violations of law and order in order to avoid violations of public security management. Essence

Article 5 of the "Public Security Management Punishment Law of the People's Republic of China" stipulates that the punishment of public security management must be based on facts, which is equivalent to violating the nature, plot, and social harm of violating public security management. The implementation of public security management penalties should be open, fair, respect and protect human rights, and protect citizens' personality dignity. In handling public security cases, the principle of combining education and punishment should be adhered to.

- END -