The Boundary of "Knowing" in the Crime of Assisting Information Network Criminal Activities

Abstract

In recent years, the number of cases of aiding and abetting information network crimes (hereinafter referred to as "aiding and abetting crimes") has increased, the groups involved have gradually expanded, and criminal behavior has shown a trend of universalization. One of the core elements in the determination of the crime of aiding and abetting is the rule for determining knowledge in the crime of aiding and abetting. Nowadays, there is a problem of expanding the application of "presumed knowledge" in judicial practice. In addition, "knowledge" itself has complex characteristics such as indirectness, unidirectionality, and predictability, which makes it difficult to prove subjective elements and prone to the risk of objective attribution and "different judgments in the same case". This article points out that the reasonable definition of the boundary of "knowing" should be based on the principle of modesty in criminal law, strictly distinguishing between civil violations and criminal illegality, and through the introduction of typological situational judgment standards, combined with the specific cognitive abilities and behavioral scenarios of the perpetrator for evaluation, strictly regulating the application of criminal presumptions, clearly distinguishing between factual presumptions and legal presumptions, and fully safeguarding the defendant's right to refute, preventing the erroneous upgrade of "should know but did not know" to "knowing", and constructing a comprehensive identification system that unifies subjective and objective factors.