Chinese, Simplified
Essentials of Judgment
1. The core landmark in a scenic area shall be deemed as "a place of historical and cultural interest under the state protection" according to Article 324 of the Criminal Law. Any destructive activity carried out on the world natural heritage in the core scenic area such as rock nailing, which seriously damages the naturalness, primitiveness, integrity and stability of the natural heritage, with comprehensive consideration of characteristics of relevant geological heritage, and the severity of the damage, etc., can be determined as "in serious circumstance" of intentional damage to the place of historical and cultural interest under state protection.
2. Where a specialized issue in a criminal case needs to be appraised but there is no appraisal institution, a person with the expertise can be designated or appointed to give a report on the specialized issue in the case, which may be adduced as evidence in the criminal procedure.
Facts
Around April 2017, the accused, ZHANG Yongming, MAO Weiming, and ZHANG Lu contacted on WeChat and agreed to go to the Sanqing Mountain National Park to climb the "Gigantic Python Rising in the Mountain" (also known as the Python Peak). At around 4 am on 15 April 2017, ZHANG Yongming, MAO Weiming, and ZHANG Lu brought an electric drill, pitons (expansion bolts made of stainless steel), a hammer, ropes and other tools to the foot of the Python Peak. The accused ZHANG Yongming climbed first, and the other two defendants MAO Weiming and ZHANG Lu pulled the ropes to protect ZHANG Yongming's safety. When climbing, ZHANG Yongming hammered pitons in dangerous places, drilled holes into the rock mass with an electric drill, drove the pitons into the holes with a hammer, tightened them with a wrench, and then attached the rope to the pitons. In this way, ZHANG Yongming climbed to the top of the Python Peak at about 6:49 am in the morning. MAO Weiming followed ZHANG Yongming all the way to protect him by pulling the rope, and climbed to the top of the Python Peak at around 7:00 am along the rope laid by ZHANG Yongming. At the top of the Python Peak, ZHANG Yongming gave extra tools to MAO Weiming, who got down from the Peak along the rope, took extra tools back to the hotel, and then returned to the Python Peak. When climbing for more than 10 meters on the Python Peak, MAO Weiming was noticed by the staff of the Sanqing Mountain Management Committee, and was controlled by the police after getting down from the Python Peak. When ZHANG Yongming and MAO Weiming began to climb, ZHANG Lu was pulling the rope to protect them. Then, ZHANG Lu returned to the hotel to collect a drone and went back to the Python Peak. She reached the top of Python Peak at around 7:30 am with the rope laid by ZHANG Yongming, and filmed by the drone on the top. Under the persuasion of the staff, ZHANG Lu and ZHANG Yongming reached the foot of the Peak at around 9:00 am and 9:40 am, respectively, and were put under control by the police. Through on-the-spot investigation, ZHANG Yongming hammered 26 pitons into the rock mass of the Python Peak. According to the Expert Opinions, the acts of the three defendants have caused serious damage to the geological heritage site of the Python Peak.
Judgment
The Intermediate People's Court of Shangrao City of Jiangxi Province rendered the criminal judgment (2018) Gan 11 Xing Chu No. 34 on December 26, 2019 that: Ⅰ. The accused ZHANG Yongming is sentenced to one-year imprisonment and fined 100,000 Yuan for the crime of intentional damage to the place of historical and cultural interest. Ⅱ. The accused MAO Weiming is sentenced to six-month imprisonment with one-year probation, and fined 50,000 Yuan for the crime of intentional damage to the place of historical and cultural interest. Ⅲ. The accused ZHANG Lu commits the crime of intentional damage to the place of historical and cultural interest and is exempt from criminal punishment. Ⅳ. Criminal tools being detained in the case, including four mobile phones, a drone, two intercom devices, rock-climbing ropes, a hammer, an electric drill and pitons, etc., are confiscated. After announcement of the judgment, ZHANG Yongming instituted an appeal. Jiangxi High People's Court made the criminal verdict (2020) GAN XING ZHONG No. 44 on May 18, 2020, dismissing the appeal lodged by the defendant ZHANG Yongming and upholding the original judgment.
裁判要点
1．风景名胜区的核心景区属于刑法第三百二十四条第二款规定的“国家保护的名胜古迹”。对核心景区内的世界自然遗产实施打岩钉等破坏活动，严重破坏自然遗产的自然性、原始性、完整性和稳定性的，综合考虑有关地质遗迹的特点、损坏程度等，可以认定为故意损毁国家保护的名胜古迹“情节严重”。
2．对刑事案件中的专门性问题需要鉴定，但没有鉴定机构的，可以指派、聘请有专门知识的人就案件的专门性问题出具报告，相关报告在刑事诉讼中可以作为证据使用。
基本案情
2017年4月份左右，被告人张永明、毛伟明、张鹭三人通过微信联系，约定前往三清山风景名胜区攀爬“巨蟒出山”岩柱体（又称巨蟒峰）。2017年4月15日凌晨4时左右，张永明、毛伟明、张鹭三人携带电钻、岩钉（即膨胀螺栓，不锈钢材质）、铁锤、绳索等工具到达巨蟒峰底部。被告人张永明首先攀爬，毛伟明、张鹭在下面拉住绳索保护张永明的安全。在攀爬过程中，张永明在有危险的地方打岩钉，使用电钻在巨蟒峰岩体上钻孔，再用铁锤将岩钉打入孔内，用扳手拧紧，然后在岩钉上布绳索。张永明通过这种方式于早上6时49分左右攀爬至巨蟒峰顶部。毛伟明一直跟在张永明后面为张永明拉绳索做保护，并沿着张永明布好的绳索于早上7时左右攀爬到巨蟒峰顶部。在巨蟒峰顶部，张永明将多余的工具给毛伟明，毛伟明顺着绳索下降，将多余的工具带回宾馆，随后又返回巨蟒峰，攀爬至巨蟒峰10多米处，被三清山管委会工作人员发现后劝下并被民警控制。在张永明、毛伟明攀爬开始时，张鹭为张永明拉绳索做保护，之后张鹭回宾馆拿无人机，再返回巨蟒峰，沿着张永明布好的绳索于早上7时30分左右攀爬至巨蟒峰顶部，在顶部使用无人机进行拍摄。在工作人员劝说下，张鹭、张永明先后于上午9时左右、9时40分左右下到巨蟒峰底部并被民警控制。经现场勘查，张永明在巨蟒峰上打入岩钉26个。经专家论证，三被告人的行为对巨蟒峰地质遗迹点造成了严重损毁。
裁判结果
江西省上饶市中级人民法院于2019年12月26日作出（2018）赣11刑初34号刑事判决：一、被告人张永明犯故意损毁名胜古迹罪，判处有期徒刑一年，并处罚金人民币十万元。二、被告人毛伟明犯故意损毁名胜古迹罪，判处有期徒刑六个月，缓刑一年，并处罚金人民币五万元。三、被告人张鹭犯故意损毁名胜古迹罪，免予刑事处罚。四、对扣押在案的犯罪工具手机四部、无人机一台、对讲机二台、攀岩绳、铁锤、电钻、岩钉等予以没收。宣判后，张永明提出上诉。江西省高级人民法院于2020年5月18日作出（2020）赣刑终44号刑事裁定，驳回被告人张永明的上诉，维持原判。
Grounds for Judgment
According to the valid judgment passed by the court, core matters in the case are:
Ⅰ. About Evidence Admissibility
In this case, the act of the three accused of hammering 26 pitons has caused serious damage to the Python Peak. Currently, there is no statutory judicial authentication and appraisal institution across the nation can appraise the degree of the damage. However, whether it constitutes serious damage is the key to whether the act of the defendants constitutes a crime. According to Article 87 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, "Where a specialized issue in a case needs to be appraised but there is no statutory judicial authentication and appraisal institution, or such designated organs by law or judicial interpretations, a person with expertise can be designated or appointed to conduct such appraisal, and the appraising report can be used as reference for conviction and sentence. …If, upon notification by the people's court, the appraiser refuses to testify in court, the appraising report may not be used as reference for conviction and sentence." Therefore, it is sensible, reasonable and lawful to appoint those with expertise to appraise whether the act of hammering 26 pitons constitutes serious damage to the Python Peak. The four geoscience experts appointed in this case all have been engaged in geoscientific research for a long time with professional knowledge on geoscience, and have published a large amount of papers or literature on geoscience or presided over key research projects on geoscience, and thus are capable of appraising the specialized issue in the field of geoscience to measure the severity of the damage to the Python Peak. All the four experts are "persons with expertise", and are entrusted by the investigating organ with the authority to provide explicit Expert Opinions on the severity of the damage to the Python Peak from professional perspectives based on their expertise, field survey and evidence examination. Through in-depth discussion and analysis, all of them signed on the report. And, upon the notice by the court, two of the four experts appeared in court as appraisers, gave a detailed explanation of the formation of the Expert Opinions, and were cross-examined by both the prosecuting and the defending parties as well as the judges. The Expert Opinions have clear conclusions, lawful procedure and strong credibility. To sum up, the Expert Opinions in this case completely conform to the legal requirements from the substance to the procedure, and can be adduced as reference for conviction and sentence from the perspective of evidence, according to Article 197 of the Criminal Procedure Law concerning expert opinions, and Article 87 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China concerning the production of an appraising report by a person with specialized knowledge.
Ⅱ. About Damage
The Sanqing Mountain was listed as one of the national key scenic areas with the approval by the State Council in 1988, and incorporated into the List of the World Natural Heritage in 2008 and into the List of the UNNESCO Global Geoparks in 2012. As the core landmark of the Sanqing Mountain, the Python Peak is unique and precious, which is not only a non-renewable rare natural resource, but also a natural asset for sustainable utilization, with significant scientific, aesthetic and economic value for the mankind. The Python Peak is a giant granite column formed as a result of long-term natural weathering and gravity disintegration, with a vertical height of 128 meters and a diameter of only 7 meters at its smallest point. In this case, the four experts appointed by the investigating organ in accordance with law have provided Expert Opinions on values, cause of formation, and structural features of the geological heritage site of the Python Peak, and the severity of damage to the column of the Python Peak as a result of the acts of the three accused, based on field survey, evidence examination and scientific analysis. The four experts deem that the acts of the defendants' climbing by hammering pitons, have caused permanent damage to the Python Peak, a core landmark in a World Natural Heritage site, and have disrupted the naturalness, primitiveness, integrity and stability of the natural heritage. Especially, at least four pitons hammered into the vulnerable part of the column of the Python Peak exacerbate the vulnerability of its structure and therefore damage its stability. The 26 pitons will directly induce and aggravate its physical, chemical and biological weathering, give rise to new cracks, accelerate erosion of the granite column, and even cause collapse. As per Article 4.2.1 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate on Several Issues of Application of Laws in Criminal Cases Against Administration of Cultural Relics, with reference to the Expert Opinions, it is deemed that the acts of the three defendants have caused "serious damage" to the place of historical and cultural interest, and constituted the crime of intentional damage to the place of historical and cultural interest in violation of Paragraph 2 of Article 324 of the Criminal Law.
The core landmark in a scenic area is a place of historical and cultural interest protected by the Criminal Law. The Sanqing Mountain National Park has been on the List of the World Natural Heritage and that of the UNESCO Global Geoparks. The Python Peak is a precious landmark and the core part of the Sanqing Mountain, and is a non-renewable rare natural resource and a natural asset for sustainable utilization, with significant scientific, aesthetic and economic value. The accused ZHANG Yongming, MAO Weiming and ZHANG Lu, in violation of the social management order, climbed the Python Peak in a destructive manner by drilling holes and hammering 26 pitons into the granite column of the Python Peak, causing serious damage to the Python Peak. Their acts are serious in circumstances, and have constituted the crime of intentional damage to the place of historical and cultural interest that should be punished by law. The sentencing of the three accused in this case is not only a negative evaluation of their acts, but also a warning to the general public against destroying places of historical and cultural interest under the state protection, so as to guide the public to adopt a correct view of ecological civilization, and cherish and care for natural resources and ecological environment that the human beings rely on for survival and development. Given the positions, functions and sentencing circumstances of the three accused in the joint crime, the criminal punishment imposed by the court of first instance is not inappropriate. The appeal lodged by ZHANG Yongming and his defender for acquittal and other requests are not established, and therefore dismissed by the court. The original judgment is made with clear criminal facts of the three accused, irrefutable and sufficient evidence, and accurate conviction and appropriate sentences for the three accused, under lawful judicial procedure.
裁判理由
法院生效裁判认为，本案焦点问题主要为：
一、关于本案的证据采信问题
本案中，三被告人打入26个岩钉的行为对巨蟒峰造成严重损毁的程度，目前全国没有法定司法鉴定机构可以进行鉴定，但是否构成严重损毁又是被告人是否构成犯罪的关键。根据《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法〉的解释》第八十七条规定：“对案件中的专门性问题需要鉴定，但没有法定司法鉴定机构，或者法律、司法解释规定可以进行检验的，可以指派、聘请有专门知识的人进行检验，检验报告可以作为定罪量刑的参考。……经人民法院通知，检验人拒不出庭作证的，检验报告不得作为定罪量刑的参考。” 故对打入26个岩钉的行为是否对巨蟒峰造成严重损毁的这一事实，依法聘请有专门知识的人进行检验合情合理合法。本案中的四名地学专家，都长期从事地学领域的研究，都具有地学领域的专业知识，在地学领域发表过大量论文或专著，或主持过地学方面的重大科研课题，具有对巨蟒峰受损情况这一地学领域的专门问题进行评价的能力。四名专家均属于“有专门知识的人”。四名专家出具专家意见系接受侦查机关的有权委托，依据自己的专业知识和现场实地勘查、证据查验，经充分讨论、分析，从专业的角度对打岩钉造成巨蟒峰的损毁情况给出了明确的专业意见，并共同签名。且经法院通知，四名专家中的两名专家以检验人的身份出庭，对“专家意见”的形成过程进行了详细的说明，并接受了控、辩双方及审判人员的质询。“专家意见”结论明确，程序合法，具有可信性。综上，本案中的“专家意见”从主体到程序均符合法定要求，从证据角度而言，“专家意见”完全符合刑事诉讼法第一百九十七条的规定，以及《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法〉的解释》第八十七条关于有专门知识的人出具检验报告的规定，可以作为定罪量刑的参考。
二、关于本案的损害结果问题
三清山于1988年经国务院批准列为国家重点风景名胜区，2008年被列入世界自然遗产名录，2012年被列入世界地质公园名录。巨蟒峰作为三清山核心标志性景观独一无二、弥足珍贵，其不仅是不可再生的珍稀自然资源型资产，也是可持续利用的自然资产，对于全人类而言具有重大科学价值、美学价值和经济价值。巨蟒峰是经由长期自然风化和重力崩解作用形成的巨型花岗岩体石柱，垂直高度128米，最细处直径仅7米。本案中，侦查机关依法聘请的四名专家经过现场勘查、证据查验、科学分析，对巨蟒峰地质遗迹点的价值、成因、结构特点及三被告人的行为给巨蟒峰柱体造成的损毁情况给出了“专家意见”。四名专家从地学专业角度，认为被告人的打岩钉攀爬行为对世界自然遗产的核心景观巨蟒峰造成了永久性的损害，破坏了自然遗产的基本属性即自然性、原始性、完整性，特别是在巨蟒峰柱体的脆弱段打入至少4个岩钉，加重了巨蟒峰柱体结构的脆弱性，即对巨蟒峰的稳定性产生了破坏，26个岩钉会直接诱发和加重物理、化学、生物风化，形成新的裂隙，加快花岗岩柱体的侵蚀进程，甚至造成崩解。根据《最高人民法院最高人民检察院关于办理妨害文物管理等刑事案件适用法律若干问题的解释》第四条第二款第一项规定，结合“专家意见”，应当认定三被告人的行为造成了名胜古迹“严重损毁”，已触犯刑法第三百二十四条第二款的规定，构成故意损毁名胜古迹罪。
风景名胜区的核心景区是受我国刑法保护的名胜古迹。三清山风景名胜区列入世界自然遗产、世界地质公园名录，巨蟒峰地质遗迹点是其珍贵的标志性景观和最核心的部分，既是不可再生的珍稀自然资源性资产，也是可持续利用的自然资产，具有重大科学价值、美学价值和经济价值。被告人张永明、毛伟明、张鹭违反社会管理秩序，采用破坏性攀爬方式攀爬巨蟒峰，在巨蟒峰花岗岩柱体上钻孔打入26个岩钉，对巨蟒峰造成严重损毁，情节严重，其行为已构成故意损毁名胜古迹罪，应依法惩处。本案对三被告人的入刑，不仅是对其所实施行为的否定评价，更是警示世人不得破坏国家保护的名胜古迹，从而引导社会公众树立正确的生态文明观，珍惜和善待人类赖以生存和发展的自然资源和生态环境。一审法院根据三被告人在共同犯罪中的地位、作用及量刑情节所判处的刑罚并无不当。张永明及其辩护人请求改判无罪等上诉意见不能成立，不予采纳。原审判决认定三被告人犯罪事实清楚，证据确实、充分，定罪准确，对三被告人的量刑适当，审判程序合法。