电子商务平台经营者安全保障义务的法律适用问题研究

Study on the Legal Application of Safety and Security Obligations for E-Commerce Platform Operators

摘要: 随着我国电子商务经济的蓬勃发展，《电子商务法》第三十八条首次在法律层面明确了电子商务平台经营者的安全保障义务，将其从实体空间延伸至虚拟网络，具有里程碑式的意义。然而，由于该条规定存在表述过于笼统、责任形态模糊等固有缺陷，导致其在司法实践中面临适用困境，常常背离其强化消费者权益保护与规范平台运营的立法初衷。本文通过剖析典型司法案例，深入阐述了导致此种困境的三重原因：一是传统民法中基于物理空间的安全保障义务理论，难以有效应对网络空间平台责任的特殊性；二是消费者在诉讼中面临严峻的举证困难，致使权利主张难以实现；三是“相应的责任”之规定不明，赋予了法官过大的自由裁量权，易引发“同案不同判”的司法乱象。针对上述问题，本文提出系统性完善建议：首先，应通过司法解释或指导性案例进一步明确安全保障义务的具体内涵与审查标准；其次，在特定情形下适用举证责任倒置规则，以平衡诉讼双方的举证能力；最后，构建类型化的责任认定标准，依据财产损失数额及是否危及消费者生命健康，将“相应的责任”科学地划分为补充责任与连带责任，以期实现平台责任与消费者权益保护之间的合理平衡。

Abstract: The enactment of Article 38 of China’s E-Commerce Law, which explicitly establishes the safety and security obligations of e-commerce platform operators in the virtual space, marks a legislative milestone. However, due to inherent flaws such as overly general wording and ambiguous liability forms, its judicial application faces significant difficulties, often deviating from the legislative intent of strengthening consumer protection and regulating platform operations. Through analysis of typical judicial cases, this paper elaborates on three main causes of this dilemma: the inadequacy of traditional civil law theories on safety obligations in addressing the distinctive features of platform liability in cyberspace; the severe evidentiary burden on consumers, which hinders the realization of their claims; and the excessive judicial discretion resulting from the undefined “corresponding liability,” leading to inconsistent rulings in similar cases. To address these issues, this paper proposes a systematic set of recommendations: first, clarifying the specific content and review standards of safety obligations through judicial interpretations or guiding cases; second, applying the reversed burden of proof in specific circumstances to balance the evidentiary capabilities of both parties; and finally, establishing a typified liability determination framework that categorizes “corresponding liability” into supplementary liability and joint and several liability based on the scale of property loss and whether consumer life or health is endangered, thereby achieving a reasonable balance between platform accountability and consumer rights protection.