Intelligent verification and first connection method for civil action litigation evidence of financial dispute cases

Abstract

The invention belongs to the technical field of computers, and provides a financial dispute case civil litigation evidence intelligent verification and first copy method, which comprises the following steps of: 1, formulating an evidence material and evidence element data standardization template; step 2, intelligent verification of evidence: after the system receives the evidence material and evidence element data submitted based on the standardized template, automatically extracting the element data in the evidence material by means of an AI technology, and comparing the extracted element data with the evidence element data; 3, evidence quantitative judgment; step 4, processing the case; and step 5, outbound calling of the first link. According to the invention, the intelligent level and reliability of evidence verification and first copy of financial dispute cases are improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention belongs to the field of computer technology, and specifically relates to an intelligent verification and first-link method for civil litigation evidence in financial dispute cases. Background Art

[0002] Due to the large number and rapid growth of financial dispute cases, most of the existing evidence verification methods use manual methods, which is not conducive to improving the efficiency of case handling by the court. It is worth noting that at present, after most courts receive the case materials sent by the parties (creditors), the contact between them and the parties (including creditors and debtors) (especially the first contact, hereinafter referred to as: first contact) is still mainly in the form of manual voice. This method has the problems of low efficiency, large workload, and slow case processing process, which is difficult to meet the batch and type characteristics of financial cases. In fact, there is an inherent connection between the contact between the court and the parties and the evidence verification. Specifically, on the one hand, the court and the parties (especially the debtor as the defendant) need to establish contact based on the results of evidence verification. Contact that is not based on the results of evidence verification is blind and will lead to a waste of judicial resources; on the other hand, through the contact between the court and the parties, the parties can be prompted to further improve the evidence materials. It should also be noted that the "first contact" in the name of the patent application of this invention is intended to emphasize the contact between the court and the parties. Artificial intelligence must be used from the first contact (first contact outbound call), not only the first contact. Summary of the invention

[0003] The purpose of the present invention is to realize artificial intelligence verification of civil litigation evidence in financial dispute cases (hereinafter referred to as: intelligent verification), and on this basis, adopt intelligent technical means to solve the problem of the first outbound call between the court and the parties, thereby overcoming the technical defects of the above-mentioned existing technologies that rely on judges and relevant case handlers to manually verify civil litigation evidence in financial dispute cases, and the technical defects that the contact with the parties is still mainly carried out by artificial voice.

[0004] In order to achieve the above-mentioned invention object, the present invention adopts the following technical solutions: A method for intelligent verification and first connection of civil litigation evidence in financial dispute cases. The system implementing the method includes a memory, a processor and a communication device. The memory is communicatively connected to the processor, and the processor is communicatively connected to the communication device. The memory is installed with a computer program for the processor to execute the following steps. The communication device includes an encryption module or a receiving module, and a decryption module matched with the encryption module or the receiving module, or a key matched with the decryption module is also provided in the memory or the processor. The method includes the following steps: Step 1: Develop a standardized template for evidence materials and evidence element data; Step 2: Intelligent verification of evidence: After receiving the evidence materials and evidence element data submitted based on the standardized template, the system automatically extracts the element data in the evidence materials with the help of AI technology, and compares the extracted element data with the evidence element data. If they are consistent, step 3 is executed; Step 3: Quantitative judgment of evidence: The system uses the formula Calculate the evidence interval value, where G represents the evidence interval value; y represents the evidence involving jurisdiction, and the value of y is 0 or 1, where 0 represents no jurisdiction and 1 represents jurisdiction; z represents the evidence involving the debtor's civil compensation capacity, and the value of z is 0 or 1, where 0 represents no civil compensation capacity and 1 represents civil compensation capacity; x i represents other evidence and its number, n represents the number of other evidence; x i The value is 0 or 1, where 0 means that the evidence does not meet the standard of evidentiary elements in financial dispute cases, and 1 means that the evidence meets the standard of evidentiary elements in financial dispute cases; Step 4: Case handling: If G=0, the system recommends that the financial institution withdraw the lawsuit or file another lawsuit. If 0<G<1, the system prompts the financial institution to complete the evidence it provides. If G=1, the system executes step 5; Step 5, first outbound call: The system automatically generates outbound information content, uses AI voice outbound calls, SMS or flash messages to notify both parties, and records the call content and call results, automatically completing the recording and screening of contact results.

[0005] On the basis of the above technical solution, the present invention can add the following technical means to better solve the intelligent verification and first linking of civil litigation evidence in financial dispute cases: When implementing step 1, a standard element dictionary template information format is also set.

[0006] Furthermore, when implementing step 2, the information of the plaintiff, agent, and defendant is automatically verified with respect to the jurisdiction agreement and service clauses.

[0007] Furthermore, step 5 includes the following specific steps: S51, AI outbound calls for execution cases; S52, query AI outbound call results; If the result is that the call has been answered, execute S53; If the result is that the connection is possible but not yet established, then execute S54; If the result is that the connection is not possible, execute S55; S53, send the FirstLink AI outbound SMS; S54, execute S51 to make a second AI outbound call. If the result is that the call is answered, execute S53. If the result is that the call is still connectable but not answered, execute S55; S55, lost connection repair.

[0008] Furthermore, the loss of contact repair in S55 includes: loss of contact repair by the public security bureau, loss of contact repair within the court, and loss of contact repair by the operator; if the loss of contact repair fails, the case will be closed or the defendant will be notified by public notice.

[0009] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following beneficial effects:

[0010] First, the data of commonly used evidence elements are set according to the characteristics of financial dispute cases to facilitate the filling of case evidence elements; by using templated information formats, the unification of evidence formats is facilitated, providing a good data foundation for batch processing of cases; by formulating standardized templates for evidence materials and evidence element data, the work of repeated evidence sorting is reduced, thereby reducing errors in the data input process and providing data support for the subsequent automated processing and verification of evidence.

[0011] Second, the use of AI technology to verify evidence data has improved the level of automation and intelligence in evidence data processing.

[0012] Third, using AI outbound calls, text messages, or flash messages during the first contact can complete case information more quickly and accurately.

[0013] Fourth, evidence verification and first-contact outbound calls are considered as essential functions of the same technical solution. This formula for calculating the evidence interval value can not only simplify the amount of computational complexity of the system in processing evidence, but also facilitate horizontal comparison of cases. It can also conveniently and intuitively notify the parties to improve relevant evidence and reduce unnecessary contact.

[0014] Fifth, in the system of the present invention, the communication device includes an encryption module or a receiving module, and a decryption module matching the encryption module or the receiving module, or a key matching the decryption module is also provided in the memory or the processor, which makes the present invention safer than the existing system in terms of the transmission of case information data. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0015] Figure 1 is a system structure block diagram of an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 2 It is a safety structure diagram of the communication device in the system; Figure 3 is another safety structure diagram of the communication device; Figure 4is a logic block diagram of the main method steps in this embodiment; Figure 5 is a logic block diagram of step 5 in this embodiment. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0016] In order to facilitate those skilled in the art to fully understand the technical solution of the present invention, an embodiment of the present invention is described below with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0017] This application provides an intelligent system (hereinafter referred to as the system) for artificial intelligence verification and outbound calling of civil litigation evidence in financial dispute cases. Figure 1 As shown, the system includes a memory, a processor and a communication device, the memory is communicatively connected to the processor, the processor is communicatively connected to the communication device, the memory is installed with a computer program for implementing the following steps of the present invention and stores relevant case information data (including evidence materials and evidence element data submitted by the parties, and case information data obtained by the processor processing the evidence materials and evidence element data according to the computer program), the processor is used to execute the computer program, and the communication device is used to transmit the data information obtained after the processor processes the evidence materials and evidence element data. In this embodiment, the communication device can adopt two security structures: one is, Figure 2 As shown, the communication device includes a receiving module and a decryption module matched with the receiving module, and the communication device is used to transmit case data information that has been encrypted by a memory or a processor (that is, it is applicable to the case where the memory or the processor is provided with a corresponding key); secondly, as Figure 3 As shown, the communication device includes an encryption module and a decryption module matched with the encryption module, and the communication device is used to transmit unencrypted case data information. Compared with the existing system that also includes a memory, a processor and a communication device, the present invention improves the security of case data information transmission by encrypting the case data information. As for the specific encryption processing method, the existing technical means in the prior art can be used, which will not be repeated here. Taking the system in the present invention as the execution subject, the present invention provides an intelligent verification method for civil litigation evidence in financial dispute cases, such as Figure 4 As shown, the method comprises the following steps:

[0018] Step 1, formulate a standardized template for evidence materials and evidence element data; the so-called standardization of evidence materials and evidence element data refers to the court using the system to compile the standard "Evidence Elements Specification for Financial Dispute Cases" and "Standard Civil Complaint Template" according to relevant laws and relevant judicial interpretations and notices. The technical problems solved by step 1 are mainly the elementization of evidence data and the standardization of element data. The so-called elementization of evidence data refers to extracting important data elements in the evidence into standardized data elements for judges to use. Judges need to use these data elements when writing various judgment documents and subpoenas. The so-called element data standardization refers to the court issuing specifications such as the category and format of data elements, and financial institutions extract relevant element data from their business systems according to the specification documents, or manually compile element data files required by the court according to the specification documents. Through the elementization of evidence data and the standardization of element data, the present invention can effectively simplify data. As a preferred embodiment of the present invention, when implementing step 1, a standard element dictionary library template information format is also set. The standard element dictionary library template information format can be formulated according to factors such as the type of evidence element, the frequency of use, and the relevance to the main dispute focus of the case. There are many types of evidential elements. In addition to the aforementioned liquidated damages, liquidated penalty, and interest, the evidential elements that are often involved also include the name or title of the party, bank card number, address, telephone number, bank card category, jurisdiction clauses and delivery clauses of the use agreement, etc. It should also be noted that the element data in the present invention comes from financial institutions, and can be directly extracted from the data submitted by financial institutions to the system, or manually searched and filled in from the paper materials sorted by financial institutions. In short, the sorting of element data is completed by financial institutions, rather than the court extracting element data from paper materials on demand after the financial institutions submit paper materials. In other words, the essence of step 1 is that the court puts forward template and standardization requirements for the evidence materials and evidence element data of financial institutions in accordance with the law. At present, many courts hearing financial dispute cases will prompt financial institutions to submit evidence (evidence materials and evidence element data) that meet the specifications in form and content before filing a case, and provide corresponding templates.

[0019] Step 2, intelligent verification of evidence: After the system receives the evidence materials and evidence element data submitted based on the standardized template, that is, after the evidence materials and evidence element data of financial dispute cases compiled by financial institutions in accordance with the above specifications are submitted to the system, the computer program in the system (that is, the computer program installed in the memory) automatically screens and processes the evidence materials and evidence element data, that is, the processor automatically screens and processes the evidence materials and evidence element data according to the computer program in the memory, and uses AI technology to automatically extract the relevant elements in the evidence materials and compare them with the evidence element data. For example, a scanned copy of a contract belongs to the evidence material, and the relevant elements in the contract belong to the evidence element data. According to the requirements of step 1, in addition to submitting the evidence materials, the parties also need to submit the evidence element data compiled by themselves. Step 2 is to ensure that the relevant elements in the evidence materials are consistent with the evidence element data compiled by the parties themselves. As a preferred implementation mode of the present invention, when the system implements step 2, key elements are extracted from the elements of evidence, and the accuracy of data filling is calculated and compared using a big data algorithm configuration; the key elements are liquidated damages, liquidated penalty, and interest, and the interest calculated by the financial institution that exceeds the statutory standard is marked. When implementing step 2, the system automatically completes the verification of the information of the plaintiff, agent, and defendant with respect to the jurisdiction agreement and the service clause.

[0020] After completing the automatic extraction of relevant elements in the evidence materials as described in step 2 and comparing them with the evidence element data, if they are consistent, proceed to step 3.

[0021] Step 3: Quantitative judgment of evidence: The system uses the formula Calculate the evidence interval value, where G represents the evidence interval value; y represents the evidence involving jurisdiction, and the value of y is 0 or 1, where 0 represents no jurisdiction and 1 represents jurisdiction; z represents the evidence involving the debtor's civil compensation capacity, and the value of z is 0 or 1, where 0 represents no civil compensation capacity and 1 represents civil compensation capacity; x i represents other evidence and its number, n represents the number of other evidence; x i The value of is 0 or 1, where 0 means that the evidence does not meet the standard of evidence elements in financial dispute cases, and 1 means that the evidence meets the standard of evidence elements in financial dispute cases. According to the above calculation formula and the setting of relevant values, it can be known that 0≤G≤1, that is, the evidence interval value varies between 0 and 1. This calculation formula and setting of relevant values ​​can not only simplify the amount of computation required by the system to process evidence, but also facilitate horizontal comparison of cases. The reason for the convenience of horizontal comparison is that even if the number of evidence in different cases is different, the evidence interval value G varies between 0 and 1. It should be noted that the debtor's inability to pay civil compensation is a negative fact. Generally speaking, negative facts are difficult to prove directly. For this reason, the present invention requires the financial institution as a creditor to submit evidence to prove that the debtor has the ability to pay civil compensation, for example, to provide evidence that the debtor has an economic source or executable property. If the debtor provides a guarantee when borrowing from a financial institution, it is deemed to have the ability to pay civil compensation, except that the secured property is necessary for the debtor's basic life. If the financial institution cannot provide evidence that the debtor has an economic source or executable property (including executable secured property), the system will presume that the debtor has no ability to pay civil compensation (presumption z = 0) when calculating the evidence interval value G. Of course, in subsequent procedures, the debtor can also provide evidence to prove that he has no ability to pay civil compensation, for example, to provide evidence issued by the relevant department that he has lost his ability to work, his family life is difficult, and he has no other economic sources.

[0022] Step 4. Case handling: If G=0, the system recommends that the financial institution withdraw the lawsuit or file a separate lawsuit. G=0 means that the debtor has no civil compensation ability or the court has no jurisdiction, so the system recommends that the financial institution withdraw the lawsuit or file a separate lawsuit.

[0023] If 0<G<1, the system prompts the financial institution to improve the evidence it provides. According to the above calculation formula, 0<G<1, which means that the evidence is incomplete, so the system prompts the financial institution to improve the evidence it provides.

[0024] If G=1, it means that the evidence meets the requirements, the court has jurisdiction, and the debtor has civil compensation capacity, so the system continues to execute step 5. It should be emphasized that the present invention will meet the other evidence x that meets the evidence element specifications of financial dispute cases i The value of is set to 1, and other evidence x that does not meet the evidentiary element standards for financial dispute cases will be i The value of is set to 0, which is to remind financial institutions to submit evidence in accordance with the evidentiary elements of financial dispute cases. As for the evidentiary elements of financial dispute cases, the basic basis is the relevant judicial interpretations and notices of the Supreme People's Court, the Ministry of Justice, the State Financial Regulatory Bureau and other power agencies. In addition, some courts have also formulated corresponding regulations on the evidence issues of financial dispute cases, and the parties can submit evidence to the court with jurisdiction in accordance with the regulations.

[0025] Step 5, first outbound call: The system automatically generates outbound information content, uses AI voice outbound calls, SMS and flash messages to notify both parties, and records the call content and call results, automatically completing the recording and screening of contact results.

[0026] After completing the automatic extraction of relevant elements in the evidence material and comparing them with the evidence element data as described in step 2, if the comparison results are inconsistent, the system prompts that the evidence element data needs to be corrected.

[0027] like Figure 5 As shown, step 5 includes the following specific steps: S51, AI outbound calls for execution cases; S52, query AI outbound call results; If the result is that the call has been answered, execute S53; If the result is that the connection is possible but not yet established, then execute S54; If the result is that the connection is not possible, execute S55; S53, send the FirstLink AI outbound SMS; S54, execute S51 to make a second AI outbound call. If the result is that the call is answered, execute S53. If the result is that the call is still connectable but not answered, execute S55; S55. Loss of contact repair, including: loss of contact repair by the Public Security Bureau, loss of contact repair within the court and loss of contact repair by the operator; if the loss of contact repair fails and there is evidence to prove that the defendant is dead, the case will be closed. If there is no evidence to prove that the defendant is dead, the defendant will be notified by public notice.

[0028] It should also be noted that in order to facilitate the plaintiff to submit evidence (evidence materials and evidence element data) that complies with the regulations, the present invention also provides an evidence element table, the main contents of which include the following six aspects: First, evidence regarding the plaintiff’s qualifications as a litigation subject, such as business license, legal representative’s identity certificate, legal representative’s certificate, financial license, etc.

[0029] Second, evidence regarding the plaintiff's agency relationship. If the plaintiff has appointed a lawyer (usually, the plaintiff will appoint a lawyer), it is necessary to submit the attorney's license, power of attorney, and litigation agency letter from the law firm.

[0030] Third, evidence regarding the defendant's litigation subject qualifications. For example, if the defendant is a natural person, it is necessary to provide the defendant's identity certificate, residence, contact information, etc. If the defendant is a corporate legal person, it is necessary to provide the defendant's business registration information or national enterprise information (latest version) as well as residence, contact information, etc.

[0031] Fourth, evidence regarding the financial contractual relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant and its execution, such as loan contracts, loan certificates, loan notes, etc.

[0032] Fifth, evidence of the jurisdiction of the agreement. If the plaintiff and the defendant have agreed on the jurisdiction of the court through an agreement, evidence of the jurisdiction of the agreement is required. Sometimes, the plaintiff and the defendant will also agree on the jurisdiction of the court through the terms of the loan contract.

[0033] Fifth, regarding evidence of guarantee, if the defendant provides a guarantee to the plaintiff, such as mortgage, pledge, etc., the plaintiff needs to provide corresponding evidence.

[0034] Sixth, evidence on the defendant’s ability to pay civil compensation, such as evidence on the defendant’s real estate and movable property.

[0035] When the plaintiff submits evidence with reference to the table of evidence elements, the above evidence must be sent to the system in electronic form. For some key evidence elements in the above evidence, the plaintiff may be required to list them separately. For example, for evidence elements such as liquidated damages (including calculation standards, starting date, etc.), liquidated penalty (including penalty interest rate, penalty interest calculation days, etc.), compound interest agreement (including compound interest rate, compound interest calculation method and standard, etc.) in the loan contract, the plaintiff may be required to make a separate electronic form and fill in the above content in the form.

[0036] The above, in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, describes in detail the working steps of the intelligent verification of evidence in civil litigation of financial dispute cases of the present invention and the first-link method during the implementation process. It should also be noted that in the process of implementing the present invention, the applicant also verified the technical effect of the present invention in evidence verification. The specific verification method is: a panel of three experienced judges who are familiar with financial laws and evidence rules evaluates the results of 100 randomly selected cases verified by the system according to the above steps. During the evaluation process, the panel evaluates the correctness of the evidence verification results according to the principle of minority obeys majority. Among the evidence verification results of these 100 cases, the evidence verification results of 99 cases were unanimously determined to be correct by the three members of the panel, and the evidence verification results of the remaining case were determined to be correct by two members of the panel, and only one member of the panel had a different opinion (the evidence involves multiple calculation methods of bank interest rates, which is a particularly complex situation). According to the principle of minority obeys majority, the evidence verification result of the remaining case is also correct. Taking two financial dispute cases (hereinafter referred to as Case A and Case B) where the verification results are undisputed as an example, since the defendant's residence and the real estate used as collateral (both are second properties and are not used to secure other debts) are within the jurisdiction of the applicant (this court), and the amount involved is within the jurisdiction of the grassroots court, the applicant has jurisdiction over Case A and Case B (y=1), and the defendants in Case A and Case B are both capable of civil compensation (z=1). In addition, Case A has other evidence xi (such as legal representative identity certificate, power of attorney, etc.) totaling 49 pieces, and Case B has other evidence xi A total of 51 pieces. After system verification, 49 other pieces of evidence in Case A x i Among them, 7 do not meet the standard of evidence elements for financial dispute cases (one of the non-compliant evidence is the legal representative's identity certificate, the legal representative's name recorded in the legal representative's identity certificate is not completely consistent with the name on the legal representative's resident ID card, and the name recorded in the former contains a different character with the same pronunciation and similar shape as the name on the resident ID card). Based on this, according to the above calculation formula, the system obtains the evidence interval value G=0.857 for Case A. In Case B, the 51 other pieces of evidence x i In the above example, two pieces of evidence failed to pass the verification. According to the above calculation formula, the system obtains the evidence interval value G=0.961 for Case B. In conclusion, the present invention has a high degree of credibility in intelligent verification of civil litigation evidence in financial dispute cases.

Claims

1. A method for intelligent verification and first connection of civil litigation evidence in financial dispute cases, wherein a system implementing the method comprises a memory, a processor and a communication device, wherein the memory is communicatively connected to the processor, and the processor is communicatively connected to the communication device; the method is characterized in that: A computer program for a processor to execute the following steps is installed in the memory, the communication device includes an encryption module or a receiving module, and a decryption module matched with the encryption module or the receiving module, or a key matched with the decryption module is also provided in the memory or the processor, and the method includes the following steps: Step 1: Develop a standardized template for evidence materials and evidence element data; Step 2: Intelligent verification of evidence: After receiving the evidence materials and evidence element data submitted based on the standardized template, the system automatically extracts the element data in the evidence materials with the help of AI technology, and compares the extracted element data with the evidence element data. If they are consistent, step 3 is executed; Step 3: Quantitative judgment of evidence: The system uses the formula Calculate the evidence interval value, where G represents the evidence interval value; y represents the evidence involving jurisdiction, and the value of y is 0 or 1, where 0 represents no jurisdiction and 1 represents jurisdiction; z represents the evidence involving the debtor's civil compensation capacity, and the value of z is 0 or 1, where 0 represents no civil compensation capacity and 1 represents civil compensation capacity; x i represents other evidence and its number, n represents the number of other evidence; x i The value is 0 or 1, where 0 means that the evidence does not meet the standard of evidentiary elements in financial dispute cases, and 1 means that the evidence meets the standard of evidentiary elements in financial dispute cases; Step 4: Case handling: If G=0, the system recommends that the financial institution withdraw the lawsuit or file another lawsuit. If 0<G<1, the system prompts the financial institution to complete the evidence it provides. If G=1, the system executes step 5; Step 5, first outbound call: The system automatically generates outbound information content, uses AI voice outbound calls, SMS or flash messages to notify both parties, and records the call content and call results, automatically completing the recording and screening of contact results.

2. The intelligent verification and first-link method for civil litigation evidence in financial dispute cases as claimed in claim 1 is characterized by: When implementing step 1, the template information format of the standard element dictionary library is also set.

3. The intelligent verification and first-link method for civil litigation evidence in financial dispute cases as claimed in claim 1 is characterized by: When implementing step 2, the information of the plaintiff, agent, and defendant will be automatically verified with respect to the jurisdiction agreement and service terms.

4. The intelligent verification and first-link method for civil litigation evidence in financial dispute cases as claimed in claim 1 is characterized in that ,Step 5 includes the following specific steps: S51, AI outbound calls for execution cases; S52, query AI outbound call results; If the result is that the call has been answered, execute S53; If the result is that the connection is possible but not yet established, then execute S54; If the result is that the connection is not possible, execute S55; S53, send the FirstLink AI outbound SMS; S54, execute S51 to make a second AI outbound call. If the result is that the call is answered, execute S53. If the result is that the call is still connectable but not answered, execute S55; S55, lost connection repair.

5. The intelligent verification and first-link method for civil litigation evidence in financial dispute cases as claimed in claim 4 is characterized in that: The loss of contact repair in S55 includes: loss of contact repair at the Public Security Bureau, loss of contact repair within the court and loss of contact repair by the operator; if the loss of contact repair fails, the case will be closed or the defendant will be notified by public notice.

Images