Abstract:The position of objective imputation is concerned with the nature of constitutive requirements. This article discusses this problem in the context of the substantialization of constitutive requirements. Objective imputation and causation are two totally different concepts. Causation is committed to the issue of attribution, while objective imputation is concerned with blamefulness. Thus objective imputation is parallel to causation and should be coped with by substantially examining the constitutive requirements after solving the issue of causation. Moreover, the thinking methods of causation and objective imputation are different. The issue of causation only focuses on the relationship between act and consequence, so before determining whether causation exists or not, we should first examine whether the act and the consequence exist or not. This kind of sepration can not examine the constitutive requirements substantially in some instances. In this aspect, objective imputation carries out a substantializing exanimation of act and consequence, thus goes beyond the bounds of causation and comes into the scope of blamefulness. There is no hierarchy in the "Four Elements" theory in Chinese criminal law. Although the "Four Elements" theory contains a substantial examination criterion, i. e., the theory of harmfulness to society, this criterion has not been included into the analytic scheme of crime as a constitutive element, and is kept away from even overtops the analytic scheme of crime. There exist three theoretical obstacles to introduce objective imputation into Chinese criminal law under contemporary circumstances, that is, the insurmountable contradiction between objective imputation and harmfulness to society, the insuperable conflict between objective imputation and causation, and the unavoidable inconsistency between objective imputation and the "Four Elements" theory. Only by abandoning the "Four Elements" theory and introducing the "Tripartite Scheme" theory as the analytic scheme of crime can objective imputation theory survive in Chinese criminal law.

Faults and Abolition of the Doctrine of Four Elements of Crime:From the Perspective of Reasonable Act

Reconsideration of Distribution of Liabilities of Crime Committed by an Entity

On the Basic Philosophy of Criminal Reconciliation——Comparative Study between Zhejiang "Fengqiao Experience" and U.S. VOR Model

Legal Realism and Criminal Justice in Transitional Society

Demerits of the Four Elements of Construction of Crime:An Operational Point of View

Theory of Criminal Constitutive Elements:Relationship Confusion and Conquer

The Development of the New Conduct without Value Theory in China

Value Judgment and the Knowledge Transformation of Chinese Criminal Jurisprudence

Objective Culpability and the Fate of Reasonable Expectation

Problems with the Theory of Anti-Value Acts: Including A Discussion with Professor Zhou Guangquan

Systematic Position of Objective Imputation

The Structure of Crimes in China Not to Be Restructured

Current System of Constitution of Crime Does Not Have to Be Restructured

Criminal Methodology and Judicial Logic

A Reflection on the Academic Approach of Chinese Civil Law:The Defects of over Emphasizing the Institutional Research and Its Remedy

Transformation of the Discourse on the Function of Criminal Law

Chinese Structure for Analyzing Criminal Liability in Transitional Period

The Turning Point to Correctly Understand the Legal System in Tang Dynasty---A Debate over and Pertinent Opinions on the Assertion of“Four Criminal Codes”in the New Book of Tang

A Study of the Research Mode on the Traditional Legal Ideology of the Ancient China --citing an Example of "rite and Punishment" from the Confucianism Theory Before the Qin Dynasty

A Historical Survey on Behavior Theory

The Principle of Culpability and Foreseeablity in Negligent Crime