电子商务平台经营者“相应责任”的探析

Analysis of the “Corresponding Responsibility” of E-Commerce Platform Operators

摘要: 在数字经济蓬勃发展的背景下，电子商务平台已成为连接供需两端的核心枢纽。它在简化交易流程、激发市场活力的同时，也因角色多元性与控制力强化的特征，面临责任难以界定的现实挑战。《中华人民共和国电子商务法》第三十八条第二款针对关系消费者生命健康的商品或服务，明确平台经营者未尽审核义务或安全保障义务造成损害时，应承担“相应的责任”。但这一表述的模糊性，导致理论争议频发，司法裁判也出现同案不同判的乱象。本文以规范分析为核心方法，结合典型司法实践案例，融入电商经济领域的产业特征与商业逻辑，系统探析“相应责任”的规范定位、义务基础、责任形态及适用路径。研究表明，“相应责任”兼具民事、行政与刑事责任属性，民事责任维度应定性为按份责任，需结合平台过错程度、原因力大小等因素综合判定；同时应基于平台商业模式与技术能力进行类型化区分，明确审核义务的实质化标准与安全保障义务的差异化内容，通过统一裁判标准、完善举证规则等举措，实现平台利益与消费者权益的动态平衡，为电子商务行业的健康有序发展筑牢法治根基。

Abstract: Against the backdrop of the booming development of the digital economy, e-commerce platforms have become the core hub connecting supply and demand. While simplifying the trading process and stimulating market vitality, it also faces the challenge of difficult-to-define responsibilities due to its diverse roles and strengthened control. Article 38, Paragraph 2 of the Electronic Commerce Law of the People’s Republic of China specifies that platform operators shall bear “corresponding responsibility” for goods or services that are related to the life and health of consumers and cause damage due to their failure to fulfill their audit or security obligations. However, the ambiguity of this statement has led to frequent theoretical disputes and the chaos of different judgments in judicial rulings for the same case. This article takes normative analysis as the core method, combined with typical judicial practice cases, integrates the industrial characteristics and business logic of the e-commerce economy field, and systematically explores the normative positioning, obligation basis, responsibility form, and application path of “corresponding responsibility”. Research has shown that “corresponding responsibility” combines civil, administrative, and criminal liability attributes, and the dimension of civil liability should be characterized as proportionate liability, which needs to be comprehensively judged based on factors such as the degree of platform fault and the magnitude of the causal force; at the same time, it is necessary to carry out typological distinctions based on platform business models and technical capabilities, clarify the substantive standards of the audit obligation and the differentiated content of the security guarantee obligation. Through measures such as unifying the judgment standards and improving the rules of evidence, the dynamic balance between platform interests and consumer rights should be achieved, laying a solid legal foundation for the healthy and orderly development of the e-commerce industry.