中文摘要

針對無故取得他人電磁紀錄的行為，立法者在一九九七年增訂刑法第三二三條，將電磁紀錄視為準動產並適用竊盜罪予以處罰，在二○○三年則是刪除該準動產規定，與刪除及變更他人電磁紀錄的行為一併規定於增訂之第三五九條。此一構成要件的保護法益內涵為何，迄今在實務及學說上尚無共識，相關構成要件的解釋因而顯得漫無方向。其問題根源在於，無故取得電磁紀錄罪的構成要件過於概括，使得各種保護法益的觀點都只能局部解釋本罪的處罰根據。在檢視立法理由的說明及國內學說的主張之後，本文認為在現行法底下，無故取得電磁紀錄罪不在保障資訊安全的社會信賴，也不在保障電磁紀錄之資料私密性，而是在保障個人的整體財產。這個觀點，最符合本罪的立法沿革、法定刑設計及法律明確性的要求。本文依此提出本罪在現行法底下的解釋方案，並附帶檢討最高法院針對臺灣陶氏公司案的判決。同時，為了根本地解決本罪保護方向不明的問題，初步建議未來宜朝保護個人秘密的方向修正本罪。

English Abstract

The act of obtaining magnetic records of others without good cause was criminalized in 1997 by amending Article 323 to consider magnetic records as personal property. In 2003, such amendment was deleted and this act and the act of deleting or altering others' magnetic records were criminalized in Article 359. The legal interest that the Article sets out to protect is still in controversy both in practice and in academia resulting in widely divided interpretations of the elements of the crime. After reviewing the explanation in criminalizing such act and the opinions in academia, the paper concludes that under the current law, the purpose of criminalizing such act is neither to protect social trust in information security nor to protect the secrecy of the information stored in the magnetic records but to protect personal property as a whole. Only this proposition could fully explain the criminalization of the act, the punishment that imposed on such act and the request for clarity. Based on this, this paper reviews the Supreme Court's judgment on the Dow Chemical Taiwan case and further suggests amending this Article to protect personal privacy.

資料來源：https://goo.gl/SbyfYB