“数据犯罪”概念的否定与化归  

The Negation and Integration of “Data Crimes”

作　　者：黎森予 Li Senyu

机构地区：[1]清华大学法学院 [2]东京大学大学院法学政治学研究科

出　　处：《南大法学》2024年第4期30-47,共18页NanJing University Law Journal

基　　金：国家社会科学基金项目“数据法益的刑法保护研究”(项目编号:20BFX074)的研究成果。

摘　　要：面对数据时代出现的新型侵害行为,多数观点主张在立法论或解释论上新建“数据刑法”“数据犯罪”体系,但这未必是最有益的对策。数据安全难以成为独立的保护法益,数据只是行为对象或手段,实际上值得保护的法益依然是财产、文书、个人信息等传统法益,现行刑法不存在处罚漏洞,没有必要增设“数据犯罪”罪名。与数据相关的犯罪行为在刑法适用上不存在特殊之处,没有必要先将一类侵害行为归纳为“数据犯罪”、再分流为传统犯罪,构建“数据犯罪”这一犯罪类型缺乏实益。应当基于损害后果的法益种类,将涉及数据技术手段的侵害行为直接解释为针对财产等传统法益的犯罪。“数据犯罪”等概念在刑法适用中是多余的。In response to the new type of infringement behaviors emerging in the data era,many advocate for the establishment of a system of“data criminal law”or“data crimes”in terms of legislative or interpretative theory.However,this may not be the most beneficial approach.Data security is difficult to establish as an independent protected legal interest,since data merely serves as the object or means of behavior.The legal interests that are truly worth protecting remain traditional ones such as property,documents and personal information.The current criminal law does not have any enforcement loopholes,and there is no need to create“data crimes”.Criminal behaviors related to data do not have any characteristics in terms of the application of criminal law.It is unnecessary to categorize a type of infringement behavior as“data crimes”and then divert it into traditional crimes.The establishment of“data crimes”lacks practical benefits.Infringement behaviors involving data technology should be directly interpreted as crimes against traditional legal interests such as property based on damaged results.Concepts such as“data crimes”are redundant in the application of criminal law.

关 键 词：数据犯罪 传统犯罪 保护法益 处罚漏洞 实质解释 

分 类 号：D924.3[政治法律—刑法学]