信息网络犯罪证明的三重困境及破解路径

On the triple dilemma and cracking path of the proof of cyber crime

随着刑法罪名体系的扩张,信息网络犯罪在司法证明领域存在的问题也日益凸显。信息网络犯罪证明存在三重困境:第一重困境是计量对象的海量化致使罪量要素的证明困难。实践中,抽样取证、底线证明、综合认定均存在一定的适用局限,以具体的案件类型为导向综合运用不同的简化证明方法,是解决罪量要素定量证明难题的可行方案。第二重困境是犯罪场域的虚拟化致使人身同一性认定困难。实践中以口供为中心搭建的证明链条具有不稳定性,应引入基于数据挖掘的同一性认定结果作为证据补强。第三重困境是犯罪结构的链条化致使主观“明知”要件证明困难。以推定的方式认定共同行为人主观“明知”存在规范与实践的失调。应对“明知”推定规范内涵予以协调,同时引入综合认定作为法律推定的补充。

With the expansion of the criminal law charge system,the problems of information network crime in the field of judicial certification have become increasingly prominent.There are three dilemmas in judicial proof of information network crime and the first one is the difficulty of proving the elements of crime due to the mass of measurement objects.In practice,sampling evidence collection,bottom-line proof,and comprehensive identification all have certain limitations in application.The comprehensive use of different simplified proof methods based on specific case types is a feasible solution to the problem of quantitative proof of the amount of crime.The second dilemma is that the virtualization of the crime scene makes it difficult to identify personal identity.In practice,the proof chain built around oral confession is unstable,and the result of identity determination based on data mining should be introduced as evidence reinforcement.The third dilemma is that the chaining of the criminal structure makes it difficult to prove the subjective "knowing" element.It is presumed that the co-actors subjectively "know" that there is a mismatch between norms and practices.The normative connotation of "knowingly" presumption should be coordinated,and comprehensive determination should be introduced as a supplement to legal presumption.