中文摘要

傳統上，由於對竊盜罪採取狹義解釋，使得無法對在未剝奪持有下取得無體性電磁紀錄之行為論以竊盜罪。有鑑於此，立法者決定擴張竊盜罪範圍，使之能涵蓋電磁紀錄之無權取得行為，而在一九九七年十一月正式通過刑法第三百二十三條電磁紀錄竊盜罪。然而，這項立法已經被今年六月剛通過的刑法第三百五十九條無故取得、更動電磁紀錄罪所取代。從此可知，立法者希望能制定新的刑法來保護電磁紀錄，以防止被無權取得。本文主要目的即是在研究與電磁紀錄無權取得有關新舊立法例之解釋與適用上問題，並試圖指出新舊立法例之變化軌跡。
本文之第二部分主要在檢討舊電磁紀錄竊盜罪之性質與功能，並討論在資訊時代有價值電磁紀錄與資訊如何受到妥善的保護。接著，本文檢討竊盜罪中三個構成要件運用於電磁紀錄取得行為上所產生之困難，藉以說明電磁紀錄竊盜罪之立法由於構成要件結構上錯誤，使得電磁紀錄竊盜罪之立法並無法為電磁紀錄提供足夠之保護。第三部分將介紹以電腦保護為出發點之刑法第三百五十九條。除了說明本罪所保護之新法益之性質，還將從事構成要件之解釋與適用之討論。至於本文第四部分則是在討論其他與電磁紀錄無權取得行為有關之刑罰規範。最後，本文將簡略說明研究成果與一些在網際網路與刑法問題上個人思考。

English Abstract

The typical narrow interpretation of theft makes it difficult to prosecute the person who obtains intangible electronic records without taking them away.
Recognizing this problem, the Legislature decided to broaden the scope of theft offense to include the obtaining of electronic records. Accordingly, the ”theft of electronic records” offense under Article 323 came into force in December 1997. However, the enactment was replaced by the ”unauthorized acquisition und modification” offense under Article 359 in June 2003. Congress has chosen to treat acquisition of computer data crimes as distinct offenses rather than simply amend existing law to incorporate new technologies. The Legislators have also revealed a strong policy of protection through a new provision. The primary purpose of this Article is to contribute to the discussions on the old and new legislations.
Part Ⅱ of this Article explores the nature and function of the ”theft of electronic records” offense under Article 323. This part presents significant questions as to how valuable computer data and information can be best protected in an information age. Besides, three requirements of theft offense that are particularly problematic in the context of theft of computer data are discussed. This part demonstrates the ”theft of electronic records” offense is structurally flawed. This part also argues that the legislation does not provide sufficient protection for computer data. Part Ⅲ of this Article introduces the new legislation of Article 359 which is premised solely on computer-specific consideration. Part Ⅳ focuses on other types of offenses associated with or involving the act of obtaining computer data. Finally, the Article concludes with a summery of the conclusions and some reflections on the relationship between the internet and criminal law.

資料來源：https://goo.gl/hYfE15