On July 28th, the Supreme People's Court held a press conference and released the "Opinions of the Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and the Ministry of Public Security on Issues Related to Handling Criminal Cases Involving Assistance in Information Network Crime Activities" (hereinafter referred to as the "Opinions"). It is reported that the "Opinions" consist of five parts and sixteen articles, which comprehensively and systematically stipulate the overall requirements for handling the crime of aiding and abetting and its related crimes, legally identifying the crime of aiding and abetting, accurately grasping criminal policies, and adhering to comprehensive governance. Based on the review of existing legislation, judicial provisions, and thorough research on the crime of aiding and abetting, the Opinion proposes clear application rules for the controversial and difficult to determine issues in practice. According to legislative provisions and the development needs of judicial practice, the Opinion further clarifies the subjective knowledge recognition rules for the crime of aiding and abetting, the "serious circumstances" recognition standards for the crime of aiding and abetting involving "two cards", and the differentiation rules between the crime of aiding and abetting and related crimes such as concealment and fraud, effectively solving the problem of inconsistent legal application and judicial recognition. The Opinion clearly stipulates that based on a comprehensive and accurate understanding of whether the perpetrator "knew that others were using information networks to commit crimes", whether they were "providing assistance for others to use information networks to commit crimes", and whether their behavior constituted "serious circumstances", a comprehensive determination should be made as to whether the perpetrator constituted the crime of aiding and abetting. It emphasizes that in cases involving "two cards" aiding and abetting crimes, the suspected criminal amount of the assisted object in the inflow of funds should be verified first, and whether it meets the relevant information network crime standards for the assisted object to commit, in order to prevent the arbitrary determination of the crime of aiding and abetting solely based on the perpetrator's behavior meeting the "serious circumstances", and effectively avoid objective attribution. In order to better adapt to the changing situation of "two card" crimes, the "Opinions" have integrated and adjusted the criteria for determining the "serious circumstances" of "two card" crimes stipulated in the "Opinions of the Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and the Ministry of Public Security on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Handling Criminal Cases such as Telecommunications and Network Fraud (II)" and relevant meeting minutes, further unifying the judgment standards. The original standard of "serious circumstances" for selling or renting one's own bank account or payment account with corresponding transaction amounts has been clarified as the standard of "serious circumstances" for selling or renting three of one's own bank accounts or payment accounts with corresponding transaction amounts. At the same time, in response to the new situation of high incidence of illegal and criminal activities involving telephone cards, the original regulation that the purchase, sale, and rental of more than 20 other people's telephone cards belong to the "serious circumstances" situation has been adjusted to no longer distinguish between others and oneself. As long as the purchase, sale, or rental of more than 20 telephone cards is considered to belong to the "serious circumstances" situation, the criminal law network will be further tightened. In addition, according to the current trend of professionalization, organization, concealment, and intelligence of aiding and abetting crimes, the "Opinions" stipulate that the investigating authorities should comprehensively and accurately implement the criminal policy of balancing leniency and severity, achieve leniency when appropriate, strictness when appropriate, balance leniency and strictness, and impose appropriate punishment for the crime. For organized, professional, and cross-border collaborative acts of aiding information network crimes, as well as organizers, planners, commanders, and key members who commit crimes such as aiding information network crimes, strict punishment shall be imposed in accordance with the law; For minors, school students, and individuals at the end of the criminal chain with relatively minor circumstances, leniency measures shall be taken in accordance with the law, and specific situations of strictness and leniency shall be clearly defined to facilitate accurate understanding and application by investigators. (New Society)