网络假冒注册商标犯罪中被告人“刷单”辩解的证明模式和证明标准——以第87号指导案例及相关案例为分析对象
发布时间：2018-09-07 11:37
【摘要】：针对网络假冒注册商标犯罪中被告人提出的"刷单"辩解,司法实践中存在不同的理解和做法。87号指导案例表达了"被告人无证据证实其‘刷单’辩解时不予采纳"的裁判要旨,另有司法机关依据被告人提供的某一证据(线索)甚至是被告人就"刷单"过程的说明而采纳了"刷单"辩解。从学理上来看,被告人"刷单"辩解是对指控犯罪数额的消极抗辩而非"幽灵抗辩",被告人于理论上不应对这一辩解承担证明责任。然而,这一理论论断受制于"网络犯罪数额认定困境"、"被告人了解刷单情况之常情"以及"法官对电商领域刷单状况的确信度差异"等现实因素,在司法实践中难以达到其理想状态。从刑事政策上进行把握,司法实践中的理性证明模式应当是辩方自由证明模式以及"合情确信"标准,即被告人通过提供某一证据(线索)或口头说明"刷单"过程都可以影响法官的内心确信,且这种内心确信无须达到完全客观的保证,而仅需在情理上具有可接受性即可。
[Abstract]:In response to the defense of the defendant in the crime of counterfeiting a registered trademark on the Internet, There are different understandings and practices in judicial practice. The guiding case No. 87 expresses the main thrust of the decision that "the defendant does not have evidence to prove that his' brush 'excuse is not to be taken." Another judicial authority based on a certain evidence (clue) provided by the defendant or even the defendant's explanation of the process of "brushing" the defense of "brushing". From the theoretical point of view, the defense of the defendant's "brushing" is a negative defense against the amount of the alleged crime rather than a "phantom defense", and the defendant should not bear the burden of proof for this plea in theory. However, this theory is restricted by such realistic factors as "the difficulty of determining the amount of cybercrime", "the common sense of the defendant's understanding of the situation of the order brushing" and "the difference of the judges' confidence in the status of the order brushing in the field of e-commerce". It is difficult to reach its ideal state in judicial practice. From the view of criminal policy, the mode of rational proof in judicial practice should be the model of defense free proof and the standard of "reasonable conviction". That is, the defendant can influence the judge's inner conviction by providing a certain evidence (clue) or oral explanation of the "brushing" process, and this inner conviction does not need to achieve complete objective assurance, but only needs to be reasonably acceptable.
【作者单位】： 大连理工大学法律系;
【基金】：作者主持的2015年度辽宁省社科规划基金青年项目“网络黑社会犯罪刑法治理研究”(项目编号:L15CFX007)的阶段性研究成果
【分类号】：D925.2
[Abstract]:In response to the defense of the defendant in the crime of counterfeiting a registered trademark on the Internet, There are different understandings and practices in judicial practice. The guiding case No. 87 expresses the main thrust of the decision that "the defendant does not have evidence to prove that his' brush 'excuse is not to be taken." Another judicial authority based on a certain evidence (clue) provided by the defendant or even the defendant's explanation of the process of "brushing" the defense of "brushing". From the theoretical point of view, the defense of the defendant's "brushing" is a negative defense against the amount of the alleged crime rather than a "phantom defense", and the defendant should not bear the burden of proof for this plea in theory. However, this theory is restricted by such realistic factors as "the difficulty of determining the amount of cybercrime", "the common sense of the defendant's understanding of the situation of the order brushing" and "the difference of the judges' confidence in the status of the order brushing in the field of e-commerce". It is difficult to reach its ideal state in judicial practice. From the view of criminal policy, the mode of rational proof in judicial practice should be the model of defense free proof and the standard of "reasonable conviction". That is, the defendant can influence the judge's inner conviction by providing a certain evidence (clue) or oral explanation of the "brushing" process, and this inner conviction does not need to achieve complete objective assurance, but only needs to be reasonably acceptable.
【作者单位】： 大连理工大学法律系;
【基金】：作者主持的2015年度辽宁省社科规划基金青年项目“网络黑社会犯罪刑法治理研究”(项目编号:L15CFX007)的阶段性研究成果
【分类号】：D925.2
【相似文献】
相关期刊论文 前4条
1 王巍;;侵犯商标专用权犯罪中“假冒注册商标鉴定”及“价格鉴定”相关问题浅析[J];法制与社会;2013年09期
2 童海超;;知识产权刑事附带民事诉讼的刑民之别——熊四传假冒注册商标罪案评析[J];科技与法律;2012年02期
3 梁建明;;办理利用网购平台售假案件中的几点问题[J];中国检察官;2013年05期
4 ;基层快讯[J];检察风云;2014年14期
相关重要报纸文章 前10条
1 记者 章宁旦 通讯员 王创辉 黎谢荣;东莞假冒注册商标犯罪突出[N];法制日报;2014年
2 记者 谷萍 通讯员 查洪南 双剑 万军;依法保护注册商标赢得外商赞誉[N];检察日报;2010年
3 通讯员 曲剑;广东批捕一起销售假冒注册商标商品案[N];检察日报;2011年
4 记者 林中明 通讯员 金红 龚树楚;上海：侵犯知识产权案呈五大特点[N];检察日报;2011年
5 记者 林中明 通讯员 段丽卿;几分钟完成涉案物品入库手续[N];检察日报;2014年
6 记者 李明耀 通讯员 王s，
本文编号：2228151
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/susongfa/2228151.html
