%0 Journal Article
%T 微信证据的司法适用
The Judicial Application of WeChat Evidence
%A 刘青婷
%J Advances in Social Sciences
%P 333-339
%@ 2169-2564
%D 2024
%I Hans Publishing
%R 10.12677/ass.2024.13121111
%X 微信证据属于电子数据这一法定证据种类，然而目前电子数据的审查判断规则只有原则性规定，且微信证据比之传统电子数据研究领域“三位一体”特点，缺少附属信息数据、关联痕迹数据；微信证据也并不存在传统电子数据研究里的原件，对其司法适用具有重要影响。文章针对微信证据比之电子数据的独特性，分析出其在适用传统电子数据规则的不兼容；并在此基础上，根据微信证据的司法适用现状，对微信证据的取证提出了电子合同签约、提高证据意识等建议；对真实性认证提出了强化微信个人专属性、变通适用原件理论等建议；对实务中常见的关联性质疑提出了不能以法官个人经验先入建议，以期完善我国微信证据的司法适用。
WeChat evidence belongs to the statutory type of electronic data, but the current rules for the review and judgment of electronic data are only stipulated in principle, and WeChat evidence lacks ancillary information data and associated trace data compared with the “trinity” characteristics summarized in the traditional electronic data research field; WeChat evidence does not exist in the original documents in traditional electronic data research, which has an important impact on its judicial application. This article analyzes the unique characteristics of WeChat evidence compared to electronic data and identifies its incompatibility with the traditional rules for electronic data. Based on this analysis and the current judicial application of WeChat evidence, the article proposes suggestions such as electronic contract signing and enhancing evidence awareness for evidence collection. For authenticity verification, it suggests strengthening the personal exclusivity of WeChat and adapting the theory of original copies. Addressing common challenges to relevance in practice, it advises against relying solely on the personal experience of judges. These suggestions aim to improve the judicial application of WeChat evidence in China.
%K 电子数据，
%K 微信证据，
%K 证据资格，
%K 证明力
Electronic Data
%K WeChat Evidence
%K Evidence Qualifications
%K Probative Power
%U http://www.hanspub.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=102832