网络诈骗案件频发，给社会的和谐与稳定以及公私财产安全造成严重影响，并且多数网络诈骗案件均为团伙作案方式，内部有着细化的分工各自负责网络诈骗中的不同环节，案件中的帮助行为在犯罪的实现过程中发挥积极作用。概念释明为研究基础，研究所涉的网络诈骗与传统诈骗在诈骗的整体环节上差别不大，具体表现形式各有不同，在网络技术加持下呈现团伙作案、影响面广、隐蔽性高跨境作案多的特点，所涉帮助行为与帮助犯概念之间存在明显区分，帮助行为的范围大于帮助犯，帮助犯仅为帮助行为刑法认定的一种表现形式。具体到网络诈骗类案件中，最为典型的两种帮助行为分别为结算帮助行为与技术协助行为。刑法认定研究以帮助行为是否具有可罚性为起点，结合中立帮助行为的归责原则与具体主观说、客观说、折衷说之主张，分析各理论学说的可行性，主张坚持限制可罚立场，对帮助行为进行主客观衡量，融入客观归责原则中构成要件符合性的判断基准，限缩可被认定为中立帮助行为的可罚范围，并对具体行为进行罪与非罪衡量。刑法认定以现状梳理为展开，结合具体司法案例，选取两种常见的刑法认定类型，即以诈骗罪帮助犯定罪处罚与帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪定罪处罚。在理论层面，诈骗罪帮助犯的归责类型中涉及正犯与共犯区分基准的争议，主张坚持区分制立场，并根据实际司法适用为导向，将正犯与共犯区分和主犯与从犯的区分相挂钩；帮信罪适用涉及帮信罪性质本身争议，根据刑法罪名设置与量刑规则的双重考虑，帮信罪既具有共犯特征，也包含非共犯属性，在罪名既已增设现状之下，着重考虑罪名界分，指导司法实践。在具体适用层面，具体裁判文书在说理部分存在较大差异，从具体案例中总结归责现状，凸显行为概念不明、普遍入罪倾向、归责要件模糊、同案不同判现象多发等问题。为针对性完善刑法认定进路，倡导明确帮助行为概念，将其从从犯概念中抽离予以独立定性；谨慎归责，借用中立帮助行为可罚性理论学说，具体判断行为可罚性，并采用指导性案例形式释明出罪路径；贯彻清晰的定罪量刑思路，罪与罪之间作出明确区分，实现刑法评价的准确性。

The frequent occurrence of Internet fraud cases has a serious impact on social harmony and stability as well as the security of public and private property, and most of the Internet fraud cases are committed by gangs, each of them is responsible for the different links of the network fraud, and the helping behavior in the case plays an active role in the realization of the crime. The concept explains are the foundation of this research. The network fraud and the traditional fraud are not very different in the overall link of the fraud, but the concrete manifestations are different. With the help of network technology, it shows the characteristics of group crime, wide influence, high concealment and cross-border crime. There is a clear distinction between the aiding behavior and the concept of aider. The scope of aiding behavior is larger than aider, and aider is only one form of responsibility for the act of aiding. As to the network fraud cases, two kinds of help behavior typically are settlement help behavior and technical assistance behavior. The punishment fits the crime’s study starts with the culpability of helping behavior, combining the principles of imputation of neutral helping behavior and the propositions of subjectivism, objectivity and compromise, this paper analyzes the feasibility of various theories, and maintains that the standpoint of restricting punishable acts should be maintained, and the helping behavior should be measured subjectively and objectively. In the principle of objective imputation, the criterion of the conformity of constitutive requirements should be incorporated to limit the scope of punishment for the act of aid. According to the current situation and the specific judicial cases, this paper chooses two kinds of common imputation types, that is the crime of fraud and the crime of aiding network crime. On the theoretical level, the aider of fraud involves classification of behavioral offence and accomplice, this paper maintains that distinction system should be insisted. To facilitate judicial practice, we should emphasize the relation between principal and accessory, and reduce the attention on the dispute of distinguishing standard between behavioral offence and accomplice. The application of another crime involves the dispute of crime character, this paper proposed that according to double consideration of the establishment of criminal charges and sentencing rules in criminal law, the crime of helping network crime not only has the character of accomplice, but also contains the character of non-accomplice. And, we should focus on distinction of charges to guide judicial practice. At the level of concrete application, there is a big difference in the argumentation part of the concrete judgment documents. Summarizing the current situation of liability from the concrete cases, it also points out that the concept of behavior is not clear, the tendency to commit a crime is universal, the elements of imputation are vague, and the phenomena of different sentences in the same cases happens frequently. In order to perfect the way of imputation, the concept of aiding behavior should be defined clearly and separated from the concept of accomplice. Also, we should draw lessons from relevant theories in order to help judge the punishability of behavior, and the guiding cases should be used to explain the path of out of crime. Finally, we should carry out the clear conviction and sentencing thought, make clear distinction between crime and crime, realize the accuracy of criminal evaluation.