Recently, there was a fight in a hotel somewhere.
Two strangers argued over trifles, abused each other, and then fought in public.
Guest A's beating guest B caused guest B's broken nose, and guest B's beating guest A caused guest A's soft tissue contusion.
Hotel staff called the police in time.
After forensic identification, guest B was slightly injured and guest A was slightly injured.
So, how should this fight be judged?
According to common sense, it takes two people to make a sound when fighting each other, and it is reasonable to hit 50 boards each. However, the legal judgment is different from what we imagined.
According to the criminal law, the crime of intentional injury needs to be intentional subjectively. If it is negligence, it may not constitute the crime; Objectively speaking, the other party was slightly injured or above. If it causes minor injuries, it does not constitute this crime, but it is often punished by public security management. In this fight, the injuries of guest A and guest B are different. Guest a is only a soft tissue contusion (minor injury), and guest b has a broken nose (minor injury). Obviously, guest b's injury is more serious. Therefore, guest A constitutes a crime of intentional injury and should be sentenced according to law. Although guest B also attacked guest A, because guest A was slightly injured, guest B did not constitute intentional injury, but at most it was a punishment in public security management.