本文采用类型化研究方法对刑事诉讼电子邮件证据进行了深入细致地研究。类型化研究方法的作用在于通过合乎逻辑的模式构建，确定不同类型之间的差异性与同一性。类型化研究方法按照一定的标准与方法对研究对象进行分类剖析，使立法者与实务操作者明晰何为研究对象的本源，应该如何围绕研究对象的逻辑核心设置与运用各种规则。电子邮件证据类型化研究试图从电子邮件技术核心出发，研究电子邮件的技术特质对电子邮件证据制度或传统证据制度的影响。从方法论的角度看，类型化研究能够保证研究的客观性与开放性。类型化研究以事物的逻辑核心为起点，采用二元分析法，无需建立主观性的概念以围建文章架构，正视研究对象存在的问题，并有针对性地提出解决问题的对策。另一方面，类型化研究在单一的标准内是封闭周延的，但在研究的体系上呈开放性，契合研究对象的无限性特征。本文除导言与结论外，共分十章。导言部分以一则刑事电子邮件证据案例引发对电子邮件证据问题的思考为基础，阐述研究电子邮件证据的务实性与紧迫性。 电子邮件证据是电子证据下的子概念，电子证据与传统证据之间的关系对电子邮件证据具有普适性。第一章从电子证据对传统证据概念、证据规则与证据原则的冲击表现出发，阐述其技术手段与法律规制之间冲突的深层原因，并提出从“现实”走进“虚拟”的可能性进路。第二章主要对电子邮件证据的基本概念进行了界定。本章以分析电子邮件证据与传统证据之间的关系为基础，指出传统证据概念对电子邮件证据的不适当限缩。电子邮件系统因素的引入在对传统证据概念形成冲击的同时，与主体进行互动，从而形成双重属性的电子邮件证据概念。我国立法采取循序渐进的方式逐渐认可了电子邮件证据的效力，而司法实践则以务实的态度承认并使用电子邮件证据。传统司法对惩罚犯罪的诉讼目的的偏好，在“技术横行”的虚拟世界里，可能进一步异化惩罚犯罪与保障人权之间的平衡关系。从保障人权的诉讼目的出发，立法需要对这种“异化”进行多方面的钳制。以此为落脚点，未来立法宜扩张传统证据概念中的核心要素，对传统证据概念进行新的诠释。第三章重点对国外刑事电子邮件证据的立法规定与司法实践进行考察与评析。与传统证据理论或诉讼理论相似，英美法系国家立法在电子邮件证据上仍体现为权利与权力之间的博弈，但与以往重视人权保障诉讼目的有所不同的是，在电子邮件证据的运用上，倾向于惩罚犯罪诉讼目的的实现。大陆法系国家立法仍以权力为重心，重点规范权力运行模式。国外电子邮件证据立法表现出如下两大特点：一是传统证据法对电子邮件证据的映射，二是由证据的浑然一体到逐渐剥离。这为我国构建与细化电子邮件证据提供了有益借鉴。第四章以域外各国及地区的类型化立法为基础，探讨类型化研究的意义。另外，本章还简要介绍了电子邮件证据类型化研究的主要内容，并就各类型电子邮件证据之间的交叉重合问题提出相应的规则适用对策。第五章以电子邮件是否加密为标准，将电子邮件证据区分为加密电子邮件证据与非加密电子邮件证据。本章以加密类型化判断为基础，深入分析加密电子邮件对电子邮件证据能力与证明力的影响。加密电子邮件对刑事侦查实践形成了矛盾性影响，如何化解加密邮件形成的二律悖反现象，需要在考察刑事证据立法背景的基础之上做出立法抉择。第六章以电子邮件是否属于垃圾电子邮件为标准，将电子邮件证据划分为常规电子邮件证据与垃圾电子邮件证据。本文从主体与技术两个方面提出判定垃圾电子邮件的二元化标准。以此为基础，本文对常规电子邮件证据重点分析阐释合理隐私期待权的保护问题。对垃圾电子邮件证据则主要分析其“公权”有效运行问题。考虑到垃圾电子邮件的危害与我国立法缺失现状，本文在分析比较国外立法与司法实践基础上，从应然角度构建垃圾电子邮件证据法律规范，内容涉及垃圾电子邮件地址的客观性、数据恢复之证据能力与证明力等问题。第七章以电子邮件的传输状态为标准将电子邮件证据区分为动态电子邮件证据与静态电子邮件证据。本章在分析电子邮件传输的工作原理基础上，提出以技术与法律相结合的标准区分动态电子邮件证据与静态电子邮件证据。作此划分的意义在于其对侦查方式上的影响差异。动态电子邮件证据主要涉及秘密监控下的证据问题，而静态电子邮件证据则主要涉及一般搜查取证下的证据问题。证据内容的差异将延伸影响到侦查取证手段的选择。以美国为代表，其立法与司法实践通过对“拦截”概念的任意限制与“同时性”标准的人为设置，极大地限制了动态电子邮件证据存在的范围，这为司法实践顺利获取电子邮件证据提供了保证。美国刑事诉讼倾向于惩罚犯罪的做法表明司法对立法具有天然的异化倾向，因此，有必要调整立法与司法实践之间的关系，并将其作为完善背景，进一步强调电子邮件等通讯类证据的微观人权保障立法，将电子邮件传输的分层技术原理糅合进立法以钳制侦查异化现象。第八章主要围绕安全电子邮件证据与病毒电子邮件证据问题展开论述。本章在以自我复制、侵入功能的有无为标准界定安全电子邮件与病毒电子邮件基础上探讨安全电子邮件证据与病毒电子邮件证据证明载体与证明方式上的不同。病毒发生作用机理的差异会影响电子邮件的证据能力与证明力。被病毒感染后的电子邮件证据又分为病原体式的电子邮件证据与输入式或取证式感染性电子邮件证据，上述作为次生电子邮件证据在司法实践中将面临向安全电子邮件转化后其是否具备证据能力与证明力大小的问题。第九章重点讨论有声电子邮件证据的突出问题。有声电子邮件证据因邮件服务器系统因素使其有别于视听资料，其本质特点是多种服务器的合成，也正是因为此特点，有声电子邮件证据关联主体与关联客体得到了适度扩张。有声电子邮件证据关涉主体的扩张将影响到证据交换总量，而关涉客体的有限扩张则会对证明力产生重大影响，特别是语音合成技术手段的使用会对有声电子邮件证据的证明力产生影响。以此技术特点为基础，有必要从证据能力与证明力两方面构建完善有声电子邮件证据法律制度。第十章主要就局域网电子邮件证据与广域网电子邮件证据问题进行阐述。根据电子邮件证据“生存环境”的不同，可以将电子邮件证据区分为局域网电子邮件证据与广域网电子邮件证据。局域网内电子邮件用户具有特定性，广域网电子邮件用户具有公开性。网络拓扑结构之间的不同成为局域网电子邮件证据与广域网电子邮件证据差异的技术原因。以此技术差异为基础，本论文认为狭义刑事推定在局域网环境与严格的保密性及可接受性的使用政策条件的保障下，可以适用于电子邮件证据。而广义刑事推定即事实推定则在“可靠性之推定”与“确定性之级别构建”基础上可以适用于广域网内的电子邮件证据。

In this paper, systematic research is adopted on the study of e-mail evidence of the criminal proceedings. By constructing logical models, the systematic research can help to determine the difference and unity among different types. This research analyzes the object with certain standards and methods. Therefore, we can clearly understand the origin of the object and know how to set and use the various rules involving the logic core.The research attempts to begin with the logic core to study the effects of e-mail’s technical characteristics on e-mail evidence system or traditional evidence system. From the perspective of methodology, systematic research can guarantee the objectivity and openness of the study. Starting from the logic core, the research adopts binary analysis which needn’t establish the subjective conception. It faces up to the existing problems and proposes solutions to the problems. On the other hand, systematic research is closed circumspect within a single standard. Meanwhile, its research system is open which corresponds to the infinite characteristics of the study.In addition to the introduction and conclusion section, the paper is divided into ten chapters. In the introduction section, it illustrates the pragmatic and urgency of e-mail evidence with a case about criminal e-mail evidence. E-mail evidence is sub-concept of the electronic evidence. The relationship between electric evidence and traditional evidence can also be used in e-mail evidence. The first chapter starting from the impact of the electric evidence on traditional evidence’s conception, rules and principles of evidence, the introduction section illustrates the underlying causes of the conflicts between the technical methods and legal regulations. The second chapter defines the basic concepts of the e-mail evidence. Based on the analysis of the relationship between e-mail evidence and traditional evidence, this chapter indicates the improper limitation of the traditional evidence to the e-mail evidence. The introduction of the e-mail evidence system factors can not only form impact on traditional conception of evidence, but also interact with the subject which forms the dual attributes of the e-mail evidence’s conception. The legislation of our country adopts step by step ways to recognize the effect of e-mail evidence, while in judicial practice e-mail evidence is admitted in realistic attitude.As to the purpose of litigation, traditional justice prefers to punish the crimes, while in the virtual world where the technology is rampant, it may further punish the balance between punishing the crime and guaranteeing human rights. In order to guarantee human rights, it is necessary to control the “alienation”. On the basis of this, the legislation should expand the core elements of the traditional concept of evidence and annotate the traditional concept of evidence.The third chapter emphasizes on the inspection and evaluation of foreign criminal e-mail evidence’s legislation and judicial practice. Similar to the traditional theory of evidence or litigation theory, in common law countries, it still reflects the game between rights and powers in dealing with e-mail evidence. But different from valuing guaranteeing human rights, it tends to punish the crimes in the use of e-mail evidence. Civil law countries still pay more attention to the power and regulate the model of power operation. There exist two characteristics in the legislation of foreign e-mail evidence. First, the traditional evidence law reflects on e-mail evidence. Second, evidence develops gradually from seamless to separation. This is beneficial to build and refine the e-mail evidence or e-mail evidence rules.Chapter four is based on the systematic legislation of extraterritorial countries and regions. This chapter focuses on the significance of systematic research. In addition, in this chapter it also briefly introduces the main content of the systematic research of e-mail evidence. And what’s more, it proposes corresponding rules which can apply to the cross-coincident problems among the various types of e-mail evidence.In chapter five, e-mail evidence is divided into encrypted e-mail evidence and the evidence of non-encrypted e-mail with the standard of encryption. This chapter focuses on the analysis of encrypted e-mail’s effect on its evidence force. Encrypted e-mail has conflict with the practice of criminal investigation. In order to solve the contradiction phenomenon, it is necessary to make the choice of legislation on the basis of the legislative background of criminal evidence.In chapter six, the e-mail evidence is divided into regular e-mail evidence and junk e-mail evidence. As to regular e-mail evidence, it focuses on the analysis of the right to a reasonable expectation of privacy protection issues. Correspondingly, as to the junk e-mail evidence, it stresses on the analysis of guaranteeing the operation of “public rights”. This chapter takes into account of the hazards of junk e-mail evidence and the absence of the legislation in our country. On the basis of analysis and comparison of foreign legislation and judicial practice, it should construct the law of junk e-mail evidence. Specifically, it refers to the objectivity of the junk e-mail address, the ability of data recovery in evidence’s credibility and probative force,the professional identification persons and so on.Taking the transfer status as the standard,chapter seven divide e-mail evidence into dynamic e-mail evidence and static e-mail evidence. Based on the analysis of the principle of e-mail transmission, this chapter proposes to distinguish the dynamic e-mail evidence and static e-mail evidence with the standard of technology and law. With this partition, it can affect the way of investigation. Dynamic e-mail evidence mainly refers to the evidence under secret surveillance, while static e-mail evidence mainly refers to the evidence under the general search and collection. The difference of evidence’s content will extend to affect the choice of means of investigation and evidence collection. Taking US as a example, by arbitrary restriction on the concept of “interception” and the “simultaneity “standard of man-made settings, it greatly limits the scope of dynamic e-mail evidence which guarantees the collection of e-mail evidence smoothly. The example of US indicates that judicial practice has a natural tendency. Therefore, it is necessary to regulate the relationship of legislation and judicial practice. What’s more, the micro- legislation of human rights on communication evidence should be stressed to control the alienation of investigation by legislation of e-mail transmission.In chapter eight, on the basis of the definition of secure e-mail and virus e-mail , it investigates their difference on the carrier and method of the proof. Different virus mechanism will affect the credibility and probative power of e-mail evidence. The e-mail evidence which is affected by virus can be divided into pathogen-style e-mail evidence and inputting infectious type of e-mail. The above e-mail evidence will face the problems that after transferring into secure e-mail, whether these evidence have the probative force or the size of the probative force.Chapter nine primarily talks about the outstanding problems of sound e-mail evidence. Sound e-mail evidence is different from audio-visual materials for the mail server system factors. It’s essential character lies in the synthesis of a variety of server. And also because of the characteristics, the related subject and object have a modest expansion. The expansion of relative subject will affect the sum of evidence exchange, while the limited expansion of relative object can make great influence on its credibility. Specially, the use of speech synthesis techniques will affect the credibility of sound e-mail. Based on the technology, it’s necessary to construct legal system of sound e-mail evidence.Chapter ten emphasizes on the criminal presumption existing in LAN e-mail evidence and WAN e-mail evidence. According to the difference of e-mail evidence’s “living environment”, e-mail evidence can be divided into LAN e-mail evidence and WAN e-mail evidence.LAN e-mail evidence users are specific, while WAN e-mail evidence users are public. The difference of network becomes the divergence of LAN e-mail evidence and WAN e-mail evidence. Based on the technical diversion, narrow criminal presumption can be applied to e-mail evidence under the protection of the LAN environment, strict confidentiality and acceptable use policy. On the other hand, generalized criminal presumption can be applied on WAN e-mail evidence on the basis of the presumption of “reliability” and the certainty of “level construction”.