Abstract: The virtual nature of the network determines that the perpetrators of joint crimes often do not know each other, and they mainly commit crimes through online communication or technology, which leads to difficult identification of their intentional liaison. In terms of the traditional theory of joint crimes, it is required that intentional liaison between accomplices should have two-way nature, while intentional liaison in cybercrime, due to its special expression, may violate the principle of the application of crime and punishment if it is recognized based on the traditional model. From the perspective of the distinction between the principal offender and the accomplice, through analyzing the forms of intentional liaison in special crimes such as network crowd crimes and inherited joint crimes, and whether to recognize one-sided accomplice, it is shown that intentional liaison is an indispensable subjective condition in the establishment of joint crimes, but intentional liaison in network joint crimes should be deconstructed and reconstructed. In the judicial concept, intentional liaison should be understood in a moderate way, focusing on its authenticity and validity. The legislation should affirm the trend of positive criminalization of “neutral helping behavior” and deny one-sided complicity. The implementation process should focus on investigation strategies and evidence collection and using judicial presumptions to solve the proof difficulties. Without breaking through the original theoretical framework, intentional liaison can be identified in cyber joint crimes.

Key words: cyber joint crime, intentional liaison, judicial determination