Research On The Authenticity Of Blockchain Evidence In Civil Litigatio

The digitization of everyday things has made digital justice an increasingly hot topic.Blockchain technology is favored by the judiciary because it can solve the problems faced by traditional electronic evidence.However,from the confirmation of the legal effect of blockchain evidence so far,its acceptance rate is not ideal.This result is caused by internal reasons such as the complexity and strangeness of blockchain technology,as well as external reasons such as the lack of systematic theoretical research and perfect rules for determining the authenticity of blockchain evidence.Because of this,in practice,judges have very different attitudes toward blockchain evidence and different conclusions about its authenticity.Based on the existing rules of evidence and judicial practice,this paper deeply analyzes the existing problems and discusses them from four aspects.The first part is an overview of the rules for determining the authenticity of blockchain evidence in civil litigation.This part clarifies the concept and particularity of blockchain evidence,and analyzes the connotation and extension of the rules for determining the authenticity of blockchain evidence in civil litigation,including the identification standard,identification method and identification basis.The theoretical basis of the rule is analyzed,which lays a foundation for the perfection of the rule.The second part is the review of the status quo of the rules of authenticity identification of blockchain evidence in civil litigation.Focusing on China’s existing rules for the identification of the authenticity of blockchain evidence,combined with the application of blockchain evidence,it summarizes the current problems such as legislative ideas to be updated,identification basis is not uniform,identification standards are not clear and identification methods are not clear.The third part is the extraterritorial reference of the rules of authenticity identification of blockchain evidence in civil proceedings.In terms of legislative concept,most countries outside the region give blockchain evidence the same status and recognize its differences.In terms of the basis for identification,the scope of the original is expanded,the blockchain evidence automatically generated by the computer is not hearsay evidence,the self-proof ability of blockchain evidence technology is clarified,and the specific identification and presumption of the true way is specified.In terms of identification criteria,the standard of sufficient proof is adopted.In terms of identification methods,ten specific ways have been defined,and the provisions of the backstop have been designed to adapt to the changes of The Times.The fourth part is the civil litigation blockchain evidence authenticity rules to improve the suggestion.First of all,at the level of legislative philosophy,establish a consensus on principles such as equal treatment and difference reservation,and achieve a consensus on governance methods on this basis.Secondly,in terms of determining the basis,we should improve the best evidence rule with reference to extraterritorial legislation,and regard some blockchain evidence as an exception to the best evidence rule.At the same time,establish the hearsay evidence rule,and treat direct forensic blockchain evidence as an exception to the hearsay evidence rule.In addition,the rules of judicial presumption are refined,the technical self-proof ability of blockchain evidence is acknowledged,and the rules of technical self-proof are established.Third,to unify the authenticity of blockchain evidence identification standards,according to the type of evidence to develop different standards,integrity standards as the key to judge the original.Finally,in terms of identification methods,hash value verification can be carried out for direct deposit evidence,but for transformed deposit evidence,traditional authenticity identification methods need to be adopted,and the identification conclusion can be made after comprehensive judgment.