Cybercrime mainly revolves around the Internet industry chain. The lawyers interviewed divided the concept of cyber crime into narrow sense and broad sense.
Teng, director of Beijing Law Firm, believes that cybercrime cases are mainly divided into two categories. One kind is criminal cases against network-related content, such as the crime of illegally invading computer information system, the crime of illegally obtaining computer information system data, and the crime of illegally controlling computer information system. The other category is criminal crimes with the help of network technology and application, such as using the Internet to commit illegal business crimes, using the Internet to infringe intellectual property rights, money laundering, fraud, extortion, and libel crimes through the Internet.
Teng Zhangli said: "Cybercrime cases often involve a large amount of evidence collected through storage devices such as the Internet and servers. The characteristics of easy modification of network data determine the legality of evidence collection. The characteristics of cybercrime cases across regions and many parties make the evidence both miscellaneous and numerous. "
Teng took the criminal case of corruption in the telecommunications field as an example. In order to let the court fully understand the real situation of the case and know the professional knowledge in the field of telecommunications, the lawyer prepared a detailed interpretation text of telecommunications knowledge and submitted it to the court. These rarely appear in ordinary criminal defense cases, but they are the work that lawyers must do in network criminal cases.
In addition to technology, lawyers handling cyber criminal cases must also be familiar with the common business models and industry status quo of the network industry. Teng said that the parties to the case are generally people who are engaged in or familiar with a certain sub-network field. If lawyers don't understand the basic network knowledge and industry background, it is difficult to communicate smoothly with the clients, and they can't really understand the cases and opinions stated by the clients. In addition, the staff of public security organs and other organs undertaking cases are not necessarily familiar with the technical characteristics and background of the industries involved, which requires lawyers to play a good role as a bridge to avoid misunderstandings and differences, otherwise it is not conducive to fair and just handling cases and resolving contradictions.