First of all, during the epidemic, several judicial guidance documents were issued successively, such as Opinions on the Punishment of Crimes against the Prevention and Control of Pneumonia Epidemic Disturbing New Coronaviruses and Opinions on Punishing Crimes against the Frontier Health and Quarantine. Secondly, as of April 17, 2020, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate released the tenth batch of five national inspection agencies to handle typical cases of new coronary pneumonia epidemic prevention and control. According to statistics, from February 11 to date, the highest inspection has issued new coronary pneumonia There are 55 typical cases of epidemic prevention and control. The crimes are concentrated in the crimes of preventing and controlling communicable diseases, the crimes of obstructing public affairs, the crime of provoking trouble, making up, the crime of intentionally spreading false information, and the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous methods. Finally, according to statistics, as of February 18, procuratorial organs across the country have intervened in the investigation and guided the collection of evidence for 2,292 criminal offenses involving epidemic situations and 3,722 persons. Among them, 603 arrested 729 people were examined, 498 were arrested and approved, 409 were prosecuted and 409 were prosecuted, and 238 prosecuted and 290 were prosecuted. As of March 8th, the number of cases involving new coronary pneumonia epidemics filed by the procuratorial organs nationwide in accordance with the law has exceeded 1,000, and the number of procuratorial organs involved in public security investigations has reached more than 6,000 and 8,000. Comparing the above data with the data in the normal state, it can be seen that within the same time span, the number of criminal cases of specific crimes during the epidemic is far more than usual, and the data shows that the procuratorate will intervene in the investigation and lead to evidence collection, which violates the principle of due process . According to this, the application of criminal law by the judicial organs during the epidemic has a tendency to expand, which also reflects the long-term idea of maintaining stability in my country's judicial system

Today, we are in an unusual state, and the outbreak of the epidemic is sudden, and the danger of the epidemic in China's large population area can not be taken lightly. Therefore, an effective regulatory method is needed to control the behavior of guiding people, so criminal regulation is loved by managers. Control method. The principle behind it lies in clever use of Feuerbach’s mind to enforce the theory that when people are likely to get greater happiness, they cut off the idea of less happiness, and when they avoid greater pain, they endure less happy. When the judiciary imposes a penalty on the person who commits the deviance and publishes it, it is intended to inform people subconsciously that if they do not comply with the relevant regulations during the epidemic, they will be subject to severe penalties. In this way, people will amplify the pain caused by the punishment under the extraordinary state. In the instinct of seeking benefit and avoiding harm, people will endure the unhappy unrestricted freedom and carefully restrain their behavior. In addition to psychological coercion, the judiciary is also a natural economist. The treatment of epidemic situations requires huge social costs.

The “chicken and monkey” approach saves the cost of treatment. However, it is worth questioning whether the judiciary is overkill in the “unusual state” of epidemic prevention and control, and whether it uses people as a means rather than an end?

In the idea that people are ends rather than means, the problem should start from the basic concept of people. According to Maslow’s theory of needs, physiological needs and safety needs are the basic needs of human beings. The outbreak of New Coronary Pneumonia is sudden. The information asymmetry between managers and the general public makes the public generally lack accurate cognition and psychological preparation. In such a state, maintaining instinct for instincts has become the public's top priority rather than complying with laws and regulations that they are not familiar with. Therefore, the judiciary should not ignore justice just from the perspective of efficiency when committing a crime, nor should it use human means to achieve its deterrent purpose. On the contrary, it should measure the legal benefits of specific situations and adhere to the principle of modesty in criminal law. Taking the crime of fabricating or intentionally spreading false information as an example, there should be no generalization of deviant behavior. First of all, people who fabricate false epidemic information should be closely measured whether they seriously disrupt the social order, and consider the spread of false information and the actual damage caused. Secondly, the criminality of people who spread false information should be considered subjective, and whether the knowledge is false information is still deliberately transmitted as the starting point for the determination. In the determination, the communicator's ability to recognize the relevant information content must be fully considered. Finally, no matter whether the professional content of the epidemic situation released by medical staff is correct or not, it should not be regulated by criminal means unless there is evidence to prove that it was done intentionally.

In summary, the continuously updated criminal cases do indeed act as a deterrent, but at the same time, they also reduce people's trust in the public power of the state. The state and its public power are endowed by the people. In the unusual state, this point should be made clear. The criminal law is a law to protect the people, not to deprive the people of their sense of security. In the face of the epidemic, the whole country should fight together to win the new crown pneumonia battle, rather than aiming the gun at the unarmed people.