Recently, by Xu Wei team of lawyers acting on behalf of the destruction of computer information system crime case, the prosecution believes that the party caused by the consequences of particularly serious, should be sentenced to more than 5 years of imprisonment, after an effective defense, the court did not recognize all the facts prosecuted by the prosecution, and ultimately the whole case of the first trial was reported, the lawyer's work has won the praise of the parties and their families.

First, this case is a computer crime, high degree of professionalism, defense difficulty

This case is suspected of the crime of destroying the computer information system, according to the current effective judicial interpretation, determines that “the consequences are particularly serious” facts relate to: the main software or hardware of the computer information system; computer information system in the storage, processing or transmission of data; illegal proceeds or economic loss; provide domain name resolution, identity authentication, billing and other basic services of the computer information system. Therefore, the determination of particularly serious consequences basically cannot be separated from the computer system functions, data or applications themselves.

Before the court, the defense searched in the public referee network, from the search situation, the trial body of this case is likely to be the first time to deal with this kind of case. To the complex and professional computer background of this case in plain language, combined with the relevant provisions of the law presented to the trial, indeed test the level of professional competence of the defense.

Second, during the trial, the prosecution changed the facts of the charge and increased the sentence to more than five years.

The defense originally thought that the trial would proceed according to plan, but did not expect to wait for the opening of the court received the decision of the prosecution to change the charges.

Prosecution through the change of the original facts of the charge, the consequences of the damage by the “serious” to the “particularly serious” standard, and said in court that the sentencing recommendations for more than five years, which intends to plead guilty to return to society as soon as possible, the party has brought tremendous pressure. This brought great pressure to the client who intended to plead guilty and return to the society as early as possible.

Not Guilty Defense, Professional Lawyer Opinions

Even though there were many difficulties in this case, the lawyer team members were not discouraged and always insisted on standing on the professional point of view and scrutinizing the case strictly.

1. Review the judicial appraisal of electronic data

In this type of case, the judicial appraisal opinion is often an important reference for the contractor to determine the key facts of the case, and if it can point out the problems of the appraisal opinion, it may bring favorable defense effect to the client. After the defense review, the key judicial appraisal opinions in this case in the legality and objectivity of the existence of many problems, for example, no specific identification process but directly issued opinion conclusions; opinion conclusions and other evidence in the case contradictory; unclear source of the test material, do not rule out the possibility of contamination; appraisal of the opinion of the use of “malicious” and “illegal” and so on. “Illegal” and other words, in violation of the principle of independence, objectivity and impartiality; appraisal of the reviewer without appropriate qualifications.

2. Examining the causal relationship between the act and the result

The crime of destroying computer information system is a crime of result, so whether there is a causal relationship between the harmful act and the harmful result is the key point in handling such cases.

In the trial, the defense through examples and drawings to show that the acts committed by the parties in this case can not cause the consequences of the computer information system can not operate normally. Therefore, there is no causal relationship between the alleged behavior and the harmful results.

In summary, the court did not recognize the facts changed in the amended indictment, and the person involved in the case was put on bail in advance of the first instance judgment. The person concerned has now regained his freedom and started a new chapter in his life.