虚拟财产刑法保护的司法现状及其对策思考

发布时间：2018-06-18 15:31

本文选题：虚拟财产 + 刑法保护　；参考：《江西财经大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：进入信息时代以来,科技高速发展,互联网络早已走进千家万户。互联网的繁荣催生出一项新事物---虚拟财产。虚拟财产产生于二十世纪九十年代。起初,人们并未意识到虚拟财产的价值,立法者也未对虚拟财产进行法律规制。随着网络时代的来临,人们的活动逐步由线下转为线上,信息产品也呈现爆炸式的增长,虚拟财产应用的广度、深度已到了不容法律忽视的地步。随着虚拟财产市场的扩大,侵犯虚拟财产犯罪也日渐增多。在此大背景下,本文从虚拟财产刑事案件入手,分析其刑法保护的司法现状。由于虚拟财产的特殊性,侵犯虚拟财产案件呈现出作案手段多样化、科技化、隐蔽化等特点。实践中,侵犯虚拟财产案件出现大量同案异判的现象,对此类案件的裁判面临无法可依、价值认定难、管辖权认定难、取证难等判罚困境。本文在对造成司法实践中虚拟财产判罚困境的原因进行分析梳理后,建议从五个方面加大对虚拟财产的刑法保护力度。第一,借鉴域外国家优秀的立法经验。在全球化网络时代的背景下,各国也面临虚拟财产刑法保护问题,特别是一些发达国家,早已对虚拟财产进行法律规制。各国针对虚拟财产的刑事保护各有不同,保护的侧重点也有差异,对我国虚拟财产的立法具有很好的借鉴作用。第二,通过立法层面对虚拟财产行为进行界定,对虚拟财产的法律属性予以明确,使侵犯虚拟财产案件判罚时有法可依、有章可循。对侵犯虚拟财产行为的认定,立法界存在一定的争议。面对立法争议,建议在立法时根据虚拟财产的特性,对侵犯虚拟财产行为进行合理界定。第三,建立一套可量化的虚拟财产评估体系。虚拟财产具有网络依赖性、种类繁多、无公允的市场价值、价值浮动性等特点,使法院在对其价值进行认定时存在困难。一套可量化、可行性高的评估体系有利于对虚拟财产的准确估值。第四,明确案件管辖权。涉及多个犯罪地的案件易产生管辖权争议,可以参照刑事诉讼法和相关司法解释对网络犯罪的管辖权规定。第五,强化电子证据管理,解决取证难问题。加大对网络运营商的管理,督促网络运营商加强数据路径管理和留存,推行网络实名制。
[Abstract]:Since entering the information age, the rapid development of science and technology, the Internet has already entered thousands of households. The Internet boom spawned a new thing-virtual property. Virtual property came into being in the 1990 s. At first, people did not realize the value of virtual property, nor did legislator regulate virtual property. With the advent of the network era, people's activities gradually from offline to online, information products also show explosive growth, the application of virtual property breadth, depth has reached the point that can not be ignored by law. With the expansion of virtual property market, the crime of infringing virtual property is increasing day by day. Under this background, this article starts with the criminal case of virtual property and analyzes the judicial status of its criminal law protection. Because of the particularity of virtual property, the crime of infringing virtual property is characterized by various means of crime, science and technology, concealment and so on. In practice, a large number of cases of infringement of virtual property appear the phenomenon of different judgments in the same case. The judgment of this kind of cases is faced with the difficulties of being unable to rely on, the value determination is difficult, the jurisdiction determination is difficult, the evidence gathering is difficult and so on. After analyzing and combing the causes of the dilemma of judgment and punishment of virtual property in judicial practice, this paper suggests to strengthen the criminal law protection of virtual property from five aspects. First, learn from the excellent legislative experience of foreign countries. Under the background of the global network era, countries are also facing the problem of criminal law protection of virtual property, especially in some developed countries, which have already carried out legal regulation on virtual property. The criminal protection of virtual property is different in different countries, and the emphasis of protection is also different, which has a good reference to the legislation of virtual property in our country. Second, through the legislative level to define the virtual property behavior, the legal attributes of virtual property to be clear, so that violations of virtual property cases can be punished according to the law, there are rules to follow. There are some disputes in the legislative circle on the confirmation of the violation of virtual property. In the face of legislation dispute, it is suggested that the infringement of virtual property should be reasonably defined according to the characteristics of virtual property. Third, establish a set of quantifiable virtual property evaluation system. Virtual property has the characteristics of network dependence, variety, unfair market value and floating value, which makes it difficult for the court to determine its value. A set of quantifiable and high feasibility evaluation system is beneficial to the accurate valuation of virtual property. Fourth, clear case jurisdiction. Cases involving multiple places of crime are prone to disputes over jurisdiction, which can be governed by the criminal procedure law and the relevant judicial interpretations on the jurisdiction of cybercrime. Fifth, strengthen the management of electronic evidence and solve the problem of obtaining evidence. Strengthen the management of network operators, urge network operators to strengthen the data path management and retention, and implement the network real name system.
【学位授予单位】：江西财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D924.3

【参考文献】