摘要
全国首例"靓号黑客案"二审判定移动电话"靓号"不属于刑法上的财物范畴,从而否定其成为盗窃罪的犯罪对象,这是二审法院受刑法学理论界关于盗窃罪犯罪对象的"有体性说"错误指导的结果。"有体性说"的错误根源在于对民法中无体物与有体物相区分理论的错误理解。我国刑事司法实务界应该主动舍弃"有体性说",并应从盗窃罪犯罪对象的几个基本特征入手,认定移动电话"靓号"可以成为盗窃罪的犯罪对象。
On the second hearing of the first case of lucky mobile phone numbers stolen by hacker in China, the judges decided that the lucky mobile phone numbers did not meet with the definition of an article of property on criminal law; also, the judges rejected it as a object of banditry. Obviously, the court＇s decision was a wrong one for it was guided by the theory that the target of banditry should be physically real held by most scholars of criminal law. Those scholars holding the theory that the target of banditry should be physically real misunderstand the difference between res corporals and res incorporales in the context of civil law. Therefore, the criminal law enforcement body should abandon the theory that the target of banditry should be physically real, and they should proceed from the key features of target of banditry and decide such things as lucky mobile phone numbers could be the target of banditry.
出处
《时代法学》
CSSCI
2010年第1期24-33,共10页
Presentday Law Science
关键词
盗窃罪
犯罪对象
物
无体物
有体物
移动电话靓号
banditry
target of crime
res
res incorporales
res corporals
lucky mobile phone number
