司法人工智能应用定位的审视与重塑 = Review and reshaping of the application positioning of judicial artificial intelligence

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

中国的司法人工智能已经在证据审查、事实认定、辅助量刑等方面展开广泛应用，并取得可观成效。但由于人工智能存在决策逻辑上的不足和风险，因而被限定为法官的辅助者。司法人工智能的辅助者定位在当下虽然具有相对合理性，但这一定位建立在人性裁判本质论、技术限制论和裁判逻辑决定论等偏误理解之上，同时也无法有效实现减轻法官诉累、量刑规范化、防范非法裁判的实践应用目的。相较之下，人机协同定位建构了一种层次化、动态化的应用格局，强调法官与人工智能之间是分工关系，而非主辅关系，更加适宜诠释和指导司法人工智能的应用发展。基于适度的技术预测，人机协同定位具象为简案中人工智能定罪量刑与法官言词审理、普通案件中人工智能量刑规范指引与法官裁量、审判过程中法官指挥与人工智能实质监督。人机协同定位促进传统的诉讼原则发展、反映技术控制主义中技术与人相匹配的观点、符合实用主义哲学对经验的认识，因而具有坚实的正当性基础。在人机协同定位指引下，未来刑事司法制度将会呈现人工智能决策权重攀升与法官疑难判断能力不断提高的司法格局演变，并迎来权利保障制度与审判责任机制的更新。

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

China's judicial artificial intelligence has been widely used in evidence review, fact determination, and sentencing assistance, and has achieved considerable results. However, due to the shortcomings and risks of decision-making logic, artificial intelligence is limited to the assistant of judges. Although the position of the assistant of judicial artificial intelligence is relatively reasonable at present, this positioning is based on the biased understanding of the essence of human nature adjudication, the theory of technical limitations, and the logical determinism of adjudication, and at the same time, it cannot effectively achieve the practical application purpose of reducing the burden of judges' litigation, standardizing sentencing, and preventing illegal adjudication. In contrast, human-machine collaborative positioning constructs a hierarchical and dynamic application pattern, emphasizing that the relationship between judges and artificial intelligence is a division of labor, rather than a main and auxiliary relationship, which is more suitable to interpret and guide the application and development of judicial artificial intelligence. Based on moderate technical predictions, human-machine collaborative positioning is embodied in AI conviction and sentencing and judge's verbal trial in simple cases, AI sentencing norms and guidelines and judges' discretion in ordinary cases, and judges' command and AI substantive supervision in the trial process. Human-machine co-positioning promotes the development of traditional litigation principles, reflects the view of matching technology and people in technological controlism, and conforms to the understanding of experience in pragmatist philosophy, so it has a solid foundation of legitimacy. Under the guidance of human-machine collaborative positioning, the future criminal justice system will show the evolution of the judicial pattern with the increasing weight of artificial intelligence decision-making and the continuous improvement of judges' ability to make difficult judgments, and usher in the update of the rights protection system and trial responsibility mechanism.