Sun [Name] – Case of Acquittal for Intentional Injury (Resulting in Death)

Keywords: intentional injury; causing death; legitimate self-defense; acquittal

Handling Attorney: Geng Luhong

Basic Facts of the Case: The defendant, Sun Moumou, and the victim, Zhang Moumou, both lived in Village L, Qshan Scenic Development Zone, City S, and each ran a distinctive “farmhouse courtyard” restaurant. On the evening of June 1, 2004, Sun Moumou’s wife and Zhang Moumou’s wife got into an argument over competing for business. When Sun Moumou returned home and saw the altercation, he persuaded his wife to go back inside their house and then sat down in the courtyard with another neighbor to chat casually. Upon returning home, the victim Zhang Moumou learned that his wife had argued with the Sun family and immediately became furious. He grabbed an axe from his own yard, slung it over his back, and rushed across the street to the Sun family’s residence, intending to confront them. Seeing this, Zhang Moumou’s mother tried to stop her impulsive son, but Zhang Moumou pushed her to the ground. At that moment, Sun Moumou, who was sitting in his own courtyard, noticed Zhang Moumou running toward his house wielding the axe. Sensing that something serious was about to happen, Sun Moumou quickly stood up and dashed back into his house, grabbing a homemade dagger fashioned from a file that happened to be on the windowsill. By the time he stepped out of the house, Sun’s wife had already been slashed in the head by Zhang Moumou and lay bleeding on the ground. Meanwhile, Zhang Moumou was swinging the axe at Sun Moumou, striking him hard on the back of the head. After being struck forcefully on the head with the blunt instrument, Sun Moumou used the homemade file dagger he was holding to stab Zhang Moumou. Medical examination revealed that Sun Moumou suffered a head injury; Sun’s wife sustained a knife wound to the head, a fractured skull, contusion of the soft tissues around her right eye socket, a laceration of her left ear, and a fracture of the wall of her right eye socket. As for Zhang Moumou, he died from hemorrhagic shock caused by a stab wound to the left side of his neck that pierced his left lung, despite emergency medical efforts. That night, police officers apprehended Sun Moumou while he was receiving treatment at the hospital. The defense argued that Sun Moumou had acted in self-defense and requested an acquittal. Ultimately, the Shenyang Intermediate People’s Court accepted the defense’s argument and ruled that Sun Moumou was not guilty. The Shenyang People’s Procuratorate filed an appeal, but the Liaoning Provincial Higher People’s Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the original verdict.

Case Highlights: The crux of this case lies in the determination of whether the defense constituted legitimate self-defense. The prosecution and the defense have sharply disagreed on whether this case should be classified as “intentional injury” or “legitimate self-defense.” Through repeated review of the case files, the defense counsel has meticulously reconstructed and clarified the factual details surrounding the incident—both before, during, and after its occurrence.

The incident was triggered by a dispute between two women over competing for customers. The defendant, Sun, did not participate in the argument and even persuaded the arguing wife to go home.

Sun went back into the house to get a knife because he saw Zhang, holding an axe, rushing toward his home in a furious rage.

As Sun was stabbing Zhang with a knife, Zhang had already knocked Sun’s wife to the ground and was now swinging an axe at Sun.

After Sun stabbed Zhang once, he was pulled away by the villagers, and the two sides no longer had any conflict.

The forensic autopsy report, as well as the outpatient and inpatient medical records, confirm that Sun’s 4-centimeter wound on the left posterior occipital region was caused by a sharp object and penetrated deep into the skull. Sun’s wife sustained a scalp laceration on the right temporal-parietal region, a skull fracture, a fracture of the medial wall of the right orbit, and a skin laceration of the left earlobe.

The above-mentioned facts and evidence demonstrate that, prior to the incident, Sun adopted an attitude and behavior aimed at pacifying the situation and avoiding further conflict; during the incident itself, Sun was in a “passive” and “defensive” position.

In the end, after carefully examining the evidence in the case, the defense attorney found relevant evidence supporting the claim of legitimate self-defense, reconstructed the facts, and ultimately persuaded the court to accept the defense’s arguments, resulting in Sun Moumou receiving a verdict of not guilty.

Typical significance: This case was recognized as one of the Top Ten Outstanding Cases of the year by the Shenyang Intermediate People’s Court and received prominent coverage in the Shenyang Daily at the time, thus wielding considerable social influence. Article 20 of the Criminal Law has long been regarded as a “dormant provision,” and in recent years, the determination of legitimate defense has consistently been a sore point criticized within the legal community. The release of the film “Article 20” earlier this year resonated deeply with both the legal community and the general public, highlighting that the lawful recognition of legitimate defense is a quintessential embodiment of judicial fairness and justice. Fairness and justice must be visibly manifested before the eyes of the public. As members of the legal profession, lawyers have an inescapable responsibility and duty to uphold judicial fairness and justice in their practice. This case serves as an excellent guide—both for the legal community in handling cases and for educating and enlightening the public on the law.

Lawyer's Insights (Optional): A case involving human life and receiving widespread public attention has finally come to a satisfying conclusion. As the defense counsel, I’m filled with mixed emotions: there’s relief at having achieved success; awe before the law; sympathy for the victim; and above all, a deep sense of professional mission as a lawyer and a more profound reflection on this particular case. “The law cannot yield to illegality.” It is a lawyer’s professional duty to defend the defendant. Lawyers must seek out facts and grounds that demonstrate the defendant’s innocence, lighter culpability, or mitigating circumstances, and strive to reconstruct the true facts of the case from among numerous pieces of incriminating evidence. Among these tasks, gathering evidence is often the most vexing challenge. By adopting a different perspective, lawyers can look for breakthroughs in the evidence provided by the prosecution. Even if most of the prosecution’s evidence tends to prove the defendant’s guilt, it is still possible—by painstakingly sifting through the incriminating evidence—to unearth evidence that supports the client’s lighter culpability or innocence, thereby restoring the truth and bolstering the defense’s arguments.