个人信息权益侵害财产损失与精神损害赔偿趋同中的区分  

Distinctions Between Property Damages and Moral Damages for Personal Information Rights Infringement in the Context of Their Convergence in the Legal Practice

作　　者：朱晓峰[1] Zhu Xiaofeng(Law School,Central University of Finance and Economics,Beijing 100081,China)

机构地区：[1]中央财经大学法学院,北京100081

出　　处：《浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版)》2025年第2期142-159,共18页Journal of Zhejiang University:Humanities and Social Sciences

基　　金：2024年国家社会科学基金后期资助项目(24FFXB048)。

摘　　要：现行损害赔偿法为个人信息权益侵害场合的财产损失与精神损害赔偿问题提供了不同的规范基础,彰显了财产损失与精神损害赔偿所担负的不同功能。但是,受个人信息权益本身特性及现行法秩序下个人信息权益保护规则具体构造的影响,个人信息权益侵害场合的财产损失与精神损害赔偿多呈现出法律效果评价方法及评价因素趋同的特征。这进一步导致相应的损害赔偿结果整体上趋同,与现行损害赔偿法区分财产损失与精神损害并给予不同规定以彰显不同立法目的的立场不相吻合。对此,应当以现行法中财产损失与精神损害赔偿所具有的不同功能为出发点:一方面,将《民法典》第九百九十八条涵盖的考量因素依其与不同损害赔偿类型所具有的功能的关系密切程度,区分为与损害填补关系密切型的考量因素以及与抚慰关系密切型的考量因素,以在个人信息权益侵害的损害赔偿认定中区分适用不同考量因素,避免评价结果的趋同性;另一方面,可以借鉴比较法上商业化预先形成理论的思路,运用《民法典》第九百九十八条规定的当事人职业这一考量因素,在认定财产损失与精神损害赔偿时有不同的侧重,避免全有全无的赔偿认定结果,以在个人信息的保护与利用之间达成平衡。The normative basis for compensation for damages resulting from the infringement of personal information rights and interests under the current legal order in China can be divided into two parts:one part includes the elements for the establishment of liability stipulated in article 69(1)of the Personal Information Protection Act and the method for determining the amount of compensation for property damages stipulated in the second paragraph of the same article.This part applies to acts of processing of personal information other than by a natural person who handles personal information in connection with his or her personal or family affairs.The other part includes the elements for the establishment of liability regulated in the Article 1165(1)of the Civil Code and the determination of property damages and moral damages regulated in the Articles 1182 and 1183(1)of the Civil Code,respectively,of which the establishment of liability and the determination of compensation for property damage are mainly applicable to the handling of personal information by a natural person in his/her personal or family affairs,while the method for determining compensation for moral damage is applicable to all issues of compensation for moral damage resulting from infringement of personal information.The key distinction between these two parts of the damages regulation is the issue of proving fault in the establishment of tort liability.Among them,Article 69(1)of the Personal Information Protection Law adopts the presumed fault because the processor and the person who has the right to personal information are usually in an unequal status in fact,and the adoption of the presumed fault can balance the unequal status and protect the rights and interests of personal information more adequately.The victim’s burden of proof in the context of ordinary fault under Article 1165(1)of the Civil Code applies primarily to infringements of personal information between natural persons,and does not usually involve the dominant position of the proces

关 键 词：个人信息权益 财产损失 精神损害 法院酌定 利益权衡 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]