作者：冀洋
作者介绍：东南大学法学院讲师，东南大学反腐败法治研究中心暨人民法院司法大数据研究基地研究人员
出版日期：2019年8月9日
内容提要 信息社会制造了高度的犯罪风险，侵犯公民个人信息罪成为规制网络信息 活动的常用罪名，但应注意前置法体系不发达、 网络准则不健全背景下的刑法过度介入。 侵犯公民个人信息罪属于个人法益犯罪，法益本体是个人信息权，它是《 民法总则》 第111 条规定的具体人格权，通过赋予其超个人属性的方式实现入罪扩张解释，与法益论发展趋 势相背。公民个人有权积极利用其个人信息， “ 同意” 构筑了信息自由与刑法介入之间的 分界，在被害人教义学上类比身体、 生命法益而否认个人信息法益自决权的理由并不充分。 侵犯公民个人信息罪特有的“ 违反国家有关规定” 在司法实践中存在被虚置的现象，为此， 应在整体法秩序内厘清该要素的内容与地位，当前置法上缺少限制信息自决权的“ 国家有 关规定” 时，应排斥对“ 经同意后出售他人个人信息” 行为的入罪化。
关键词 个人信息 超个人法益 自决权 权利人同意 整体法秩序
Abstract: Information society has created a high risk of crime, and the crime of infringing on citizens' personal information has become a common accusation to regulate network information activities, but we should pay attention to the excessive involvement of the Criminal Law under the background of underdeveloped prepositive law system and unsound network norms. The crime of infringing on citizens' personal information belongs to the crime of personal legal interest, and the noumenon of legal interest is the right to personal information which is specific personality right stipulated in article 111 of General Provisions of the Civil Law by endowing the transpersonal attribute to realize the interpretation of incrimination expansion, which is against the development trend of the legal interest theory. Citizens have the right to actively use their personal information, the agreements have constructed the boundary between information freedom and intervention of the Criminal Law, and the reason that in victim dogmatics analogizing legal interests of body and life and denying legal interest self-determination right of personal information is not sufficient. There exists a phenomenon that 'violating the relevant provisions of the State' which is unique in the crime of infringing on citizens' personal information is neglected in judicial practice, therefore, the content and status of this element should be clarified in the overall legal order. When the prepositive law lacks relevant provisions of the State that restrict information self-determination right, the criminalization of the act of selling personal information of others with consent should be rejected.