摘要
尽管我国司法机关一般能恪守成文法主义认定侵犯商业秘密罪的罪量要素,但也可能出于实用主义思维对其进行灵活处理或柔性解释。罪刑法定原则追求形式明确性和实质明确性,但本罪罪量要素的调整存在违反明确性原则的隐忧。当前对“情节严重”的体系定位要么缺乏阶层式判断,要么类型化程度不高,应当对明确性原则的适用过程进一步予以具体化、精细化,按照“保护法益——犯罪构造——情节内容”的顺序展开判断。本罪的法益应为我国商业秘密管理制度利益,是一种不真正的集合法益,其犯罪结构包括实害犯和抽象危险犯,要配置相应的罪量要素以提升每种风险行为类型的不法程度。根据类型化审查和个别化审查,本罪的罪量要素涵盖结果不法要素、行为不法要素以及客观外界因素。
Although judicial organs in China can generally abide by the statutory doctrine to identify the quantitative elements of the crime of infringing trade secrets,they may also deal with or interpret it flexibly on pragmatic thinking.The principle of legally prescribed crime and punishment pursues formal clarity and substantive clarity,but there is hidden worry about violating the principle of clarity as the adjustment of the quantitative elements.At present,the system positioning of“serious circumstance”either lacks hierarchical judgment or the degree of typing is not high,the application process of the principle of clarity should be further concretized and refined,and judged in the order of“protected legal interest-criminal structurecontent of circumstance”.The legal interest of this crime should be the institutional benefits of trade secret management in China and it is an unreal collective legal interest.Its criminal structure includes actual damage off ence and abstract potential damage off ence.Corresponding quantitative elements should be configured to improve the illegality of each type of risk behavior.According to the typed review and individualized review,the quantitative elements of this crime include the elements of illegal result,illegal act and objective external factors.
出处
《政法论坛》
CSSCI
北大核心
2023年第3期142-154,共13页
Tribune of Political Science and Law
关键词
侵犯商业秘密罪
罪量要素
明确性原则
保护法益
犯罪构造
Crime of Infringing Trade Secrets
Quantitative Elements
Principle of Clarity
Protected Legal Interest
Criminal Structure
作者简介
李冠煜,华中科技大学法学院副教授。
