An Analysis Of The Criminal Responsibility Model Of Network Service Provider's Help Behavior

With the popularization of the Internet today,the phenomenon that Internet service providers use the Internet to carry out illegal and criminal activities is becoming more and more widespread.In recent years,the state has provided corresponding system supply in legislation and judicature.However,due to the particularity of Internet service providers' helping behaviors and the crudeness of relevant judicial application standards,the boundaries between criminal liability modes are blurred and the relevant judicial application rate is not high.In order to give full play to the effect of network crime legislation,which must be criminal liability for the network service provider to help model analysis,solve the problems such as unclear responsibility,liability concurrence between model,and based on responsibility model,the elements that the constitutive requirements of the relevant charges reasonable limit,straighten out the logical relationship between various crimes has to undertake,and to avoid such problems as inappropriate Internet crime legislation applicable or empty.The first part of this paper analyzes and summarizes the criminal responsibility classification modes of network service providers' helping behaviors by existing scholars.It is known that scholars generally divide the criminal responsibility of Internet service providers' helping behaviors into three modes: accomplice responsibility,accomplice responsibility and non-performance of legal obligation responsibility.However,it is a gradual process from the traditional accomplice responsibility to the principal responsibility.Scholars have different views on the classification and definition of the responsibility,which indicates the irrationality of the model definition.In view of this,the article first classifies and briefly analyzes the provisions of the criminal law of Internet service providers' helping behavior in the original mode.The second part of this paper,based on the original liability model,analyzes the demarcation of accomplice's liability and the criminal responsibility of the accomplice's principal offense,the internal application of the accomplice's principal offense,the conflictbetween the application of the accomplice's principal offense and the liability for non-performance of legal obligations,and the application of the liability for non-performance of legal obligations.It can be seen from the analysis that the essence of the three liability modes is to take "collusion","knowing clearly" and "not knowing" as the defining marks of the liability mode.Therefore,this sign can redefine the criminal liability of the Internet service provider's helping behavior.The third part introduces the mode of collusion.First of all,collusion is interpreted.It is pointed out that under this mode,the age and number of criminals are dissimilated,and the dissimilation of criminal behavior is manifested in two aspects: physical causality is mainly reflected in technology;Joint criminal act has a high degree of independence.When the mode of "collusion" is applied to deal with network alienation,the legal age of criminal responsibility cannot be lowered.It helps the perpetrator not to know that the age of the perpetrator does not affect the identification of network joint crime.It also analyzes whether the perpetrator is "collusion" to reach a consensus on the use of network illegal technology and implement it.The fourth part introduces the mode of "knowing clearly".Firstly,"knowing clearly" is interpreted.Based on various theories of neutral penalty range of helping behaviors,starting from the elements of constitutive elements,the criminal liability boundary of the crime of helping information network crime under the mode of "knowing clearly" is analyzed.The general situation of the comparison between helping behavior and similar technology-neutral behavior,the public welfare nature of helping behavior,the possibility of helping the actor to fulfill his obligation,and the causal relationship between helping behavior and the harmful result should be taken as the objective scope of investigation.Take "knowing clearly" including "knowing" and "should know","crime" including illegal and criminal ACTS,and the psychology of helping the actor as the subjective boundary of hope or indulgence;The important criterion of "serious circumstances" is whether risks are actually created and realized which are not allowed by law.The fifth part introduces the "unknown" mode.The "collusion" is interpreted to provethat Internet service providers have the status of guarantor for the dominance of risk sources.The article analyzes the constitution of the crime of refusing to perform the duty of information system security administration,that is,helping the actor "not to fulfill the obligation of information security" + "supervision department orders to take corrective measures" + helping the actor intentionally not to take corrective measures + causing one of the four objective manifestations of the harmful consequences.