Self-defense State of obligation
An unjust attack must only be of human origin. It must be a serious and certain danger.
There can be no self-defense against self-defense. The perpetrator must not knowingly cause the danger.
The perpetrator’s liability for compensation is eliminated. Serious and imminent danger; It can be caused by human movements, animal attacks or natural events.
If the perpetrator himself causes an unjust attack, he can benefit from self-defense. The perpetrator should not have an obligation to face the danger (the police cannot leave the rally area and flee)
The unfair attack must continue. A person who is faced with a serious and certain danger cannot be punished for the damage he caused to a third person or his property.
What happened, its realization or its repetition must be an unjust attack. A person who is faced with a serious and certain danger can take advantage of this right to protect himself or a third party.
There should be a ratio between the attack and the damage in defense. There must be a ratio between the serious and absolute danger and the damage to the right of another.
The perpetrator need not be imputable or punishable for the act to be deemed wrong. The protected right must be equal to or superior to the sacrificed right.
Unjust attack can be execution or negligence, so self-defense is possible against negligence and executive attacks. Responsibility for compensation of the perpetrator is reserved.
For the perpetrator to benefit from self-defense, the wrongful act does not have to constitute a crime.
