北京邮电大学学报(社会科学版) ›› 2023, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (3): 62-70.doi: 10.19722/j.cnki.1008-7729.2022.0157

• 互联网治理与法律 • 上一篇    下一篇

网络共同犯罪中意思联络之司法认定

陈小彪(1973—),男,湖南郴州人,博士,副教授   

  1. 西南政法大学,重庆 401120
  • 收稿日期:2022-12-13 出版日期:2023-06-30 发布日期:2023-06-30
  • 作者简介:陈小彪(1973—),男,湖南郴州人,博士,副教授
  • 基金资助:
    中国法学会部级法学研究课题(CLS(2022)D29)

Judicial Determination of Intentional Liaison in Cyber Joint Crime

  1. Southwest University of Political Science & Law, Chongqing 401120, China
  • Received:2022-12-13 Online:2023-06-30 Published:2023-06-30

摘要: 网络虚拟性决定了网络共同犯罪行为人之间往往互不相识,他们通过网上交流或技术进行犯罪,其意思联络难以认定。就传统共同犯罪理论而言,共犯之间的意思联络应当具备双向性,而网络犯罪中意思联络基于其特殊表现形式,按照传统认定模式可能有违罪责刑相适用原则。从正犯与共犯区分角度,通过分析网络聚众犯罪、承继共同犯罪等特殊犯罪的意思联络形式以及是否承认片面共犯,说明意思联络是共同犯罪成立中不可或缺的主观条件,但应当重新解构与建构网络共同犯罪中的意思联络。在司法理念上将意思联络做缓和化理解,注重意思联络的真实性和有效性,立法上应肯定“中立帮助行为”的正犯化趋势,否定片面共犯,具体路径上注重侦查策略和证据收集,科学运用司法推定解决证明难题,无需突破原有理论框架,即可认定网络共同犯罪中的意思联络。

关键词: 网络共同犯罪, 意思联络, 司法认定

Abstract: The virtual nature of the network determines that the perpetrators of joint crimes often do not know each other, and they mainly commit crimes through online communication or technology, which leads to difficult identification of their intentional liaison. In terms of the traditional theory of joint crimes, it is required that intentional liaison between accomplices should have two-way nature, while intentional liaison in cybercrime, due to its special expression, may violate the principle of the application of crime and punishment if it is recognized based on the traditional model. From the perspective of the distinction between the principal offender and the accomplice, through analyzing the forms of intentional liaison in special crimes such as network crowd crimes and inherited joint crimes, and whether to recognize one-sided accomplice, it is shown that intentional liaison is an indispensable subjective condition in the establishment of joint crimes, but intentional liaison in network joint crimes should be deconstructed and reconstructed. In the judicial concept, intentional liaison should be understood in a moderate way, focusing on its authenticity and validity. The legislation should affirm the trend of positive criminalization of “neutral helping behavior” and deny one-sided complicity. The implementation process should focus on investigation strategies and evidence collection and using judicial presumptions to solve the proof difficulties. Without breaking through the original theoretical framework, intentional liaison can be identified in cyber joint crimes.

Key words: cyber joint crime, intentional liaison, judicial determination

中图分类号: