[2] The molester who groped breasts laughs arrogantly, while those who act bravely for justice are in fear.

[4] Compiled from: China Economic Net, The Paper
 
Case review
At 18:36 on June 1, inside a shopping mall in Lengtan District, Lei (male, born February 4, 1966) deliberately bumped his arm against Ai's (female, born September 17, 2002) chest, which led to an argument between Lei and Hu (male, born January 7, 2002), Ai's boyfriend who was with her at the time.

 
 

Later, while both parties were in the mall's surveillance room reviewing the footage, Lei took the opportunity to run out. Hu chased him to the parking lot outside the mall and kicked at Lei twice but missed. A third kick struck Lei, causing him to fall and sustain injuries. According to forensic identification, Lei suffered a comminuted fracture of the right humeral head and a comminuted intertrochanteric fracture of the right femur. Both fractures were fresh, and each injury constituted a Level I injury. In response to Lei's act of indecent assault against another person, the public security organ accepted the case for investigation on June 1. Given that he is still undergoing medical treatment, no compulsory measures have been taken against him for the time being.
 
On June 10, upon learning that Lei was to undergo surgery, Hu's parents paid 10,000 yuan for the procedure. On July 14, Hu, accompanied by family members, went with Lei to the police station for another mediation session, “where Lei demanded 200,000 yuan in compensation.” According to Hu's father, Hu Moujun, after this demand was rejected, his son Hu was placed under criminal detention on August 21.

 
 

On August 26, the Yongzhou City Court, in response to the recent public concern over the case of a "male student kicking and injuring a molester," attached great importance to the matter and has ordered the Lengshuitan Branch to withdraw the case, immediately lift the criminal detention of Hu, and upgrade the investigation to be re-conducted by the city court.
 
For Lei's unlawful act of indecent assault on another person, the Lengshuitan Branch imposed a 15-day administrative detention in accordance with the Law of the People's Republic of China on Penalties for Administration of Public Security.

 

 
Analysis: How to characterize Hu's behavior?
1. Failure to meet the timeliness requirement for good Samaritan acts
According to the relevant provisions of the General Principles of Civil Law of our country: Acting courageously for a just cause is a lawful act, referring to an act in which an individual, regardless of personal safety, protects the interests of the state and the collective and the personal and property safety of others by struggling against illegal and criminal acts or by rushing to deal with emergencies, disaster relief, or saving people. Acting courageously for a just cause is mainly manifested as struggling against “ongoing unlawful infringement,” and its timeliness requirements are relatively strong.
 
In this case, if Lei was molesting a female student and Hu kicked Lei, causing minor injuries, Hu's act would constitute acting bravely for a just cause and would not constitute a crime. However, Hu kicked Lei to prevent his escape during identification in the monitoring room, at which point the purpose was no longer to avoid ongoing unlawful infringement, and Hu's act caused Lei minor injuries, so it does not qualify as acting bravely for a just cause.
 
2. Acting to uphold justice falls within the scope of civil law adjustment, while the crime of intentional injury is a crime defined in the Criminal Law for acts that intentionally and unlawfully harm others' physical health.
First, China's Criminal Law contains no provisions regarding acting bravely for a just cause.
 
Article 20 of the Criminal Law provides a clear definition of justifiable defense: an act taken to stop an ongoing unlawful infringement in order to protect the state's interests, the public interest, or one's own or another person's person, property, and other rights, and which causes harm to the unlawful infringer, constitutes justifiable defense and does not incur criminal liability.
 
[1] However, in this case, Lei’s unlawful infringement had already ended. Even if Hu suspected that Lei would continue the unlawful infringement and kicked him, his act should be classified as preemptive defense or imagined defense. If such defensive acts cause harmful consequences that constitute a crime, criminal liability shall be borne.
 
3. May be regarded as a false citizen's arrest.
[3] Article 84 of the Criminal Procedure Law: Any citizen may immediately seize and deliver to a public security organ, a people’s procuratorate, or a people’s court any of the following persons: (1) those who are committing a crime or are discovered immediately after committing a crime; (2) those who are wanted; (3) those who have escaped from prison; (4) those who are being pursued.
 
Regarding whether an ordinary citizen's act of seizing and delivering a suspect causes minor injuries that exceed the necessary limits, Professor Luo Xiang of China University of Political Science and Law holds that even if Hu's conduct exceeded the necessary limits, it would constitute “negligence,” and “negligence” causing minor injuries does not constitute a crime. Therefore, even if Hu's conduct amounted to excessive seizure and delivery, it would not constitute a crime, and criminal detention should not be imposed on him. In addition, Professor Luo Xiang believes that even if seizure and delivery is limited to conduct directed at criminal acts, Hu's conduct can still be regarded as an imaginary seizure and delivery, which can exclude criminal intent. Since negligence does not give rise to criminal liability for minor injuries, it does not constitute a crime.
 
 
[1] The author's perspective
The law not only regulates social behavior but also guides public values and social norms. The Civil Code clarifies the respective liabilities of tortfeasors and beneficiaries, and also makes clear that those who act courageously for justice shall not bear civil liability under the law. This helps put an end to the phenomenon of “heroes shedding blood and tears” and fosters a positive social atmosphere of standing up for what is right.
 
[6] In this case, although Lei violated the law first, the victim should also pay attention to methods and means when asserting rights, adopting non-aggressive measures to detain the infringing party or seek other assistance as much as possible, to minimize harm to themselves and others.
 
Society advocates for righteous acts of courage, but if the unlawful infringement has ceased, attention should be paid to the intensity of the intervention. Good deeds and goodwill should be respected and protected, so that the traditional virtue of righteous courage can be promoted in society.