本文選題：商業(yè)秘密　切入點：侵犯商業(yè)秘密罪　出處：《黑龍江大學》2013年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】：商業(yè)秘密作為一種能為權利人帶來經濟利益和競爭優(yōu)勢的無形財產，其重要性日益明顯，侵犯商業(yè)秘密的行為已經蔓延到經濟活動的各個方面，同時不僅是對相關權利人的侵害，也是對國家經濟安全的威脅。因此,刑事保護商業(yè)秘密已經成為一種必要手段。美國和中國分別于1996年和1997年通過刑事立法將侵犯商業(yè)秘密的行為進行犯罪化,也說明中美兩國在對商業(yè)秘密保護上的相同的價值判斷。本文通過力拓侵犯商業(yè)秘密罪案和鐘東凡經濟間諜罪案的對比作為出發(fā)點，結合中美侵犯商業(yè)秘密罪的立法比較，提出完善我國商業(yè)秘密刑事保護的一些建議。 文章共分為三個部分，第一部分是對兩個典型案例事實的介紹，簡要闡述有關侵犯商業(yè)秘密所引發(fā)的問題，為下文的論述做鋪墊。第二部分從我國和美國保護商業(yè)秘密的刑事立法角度，結合案例引發(fā)的問題，分別從以下方面進行論述：首先，從商業(yè)秘密保護的理論出發(fā)，由合同法理論到侵權法理論最終上升到財產權理論，奠定了商業(yè)秘密刑事保護的基礎；其次，對商業(yè)秘密的特征進行比較，，我國與美國商業(yè)秘密的主要區(qū)別在于對實用性的有無的規(guī)定上；再次，對本罪的入罪標準進行分析，美國采用的是定性入罪模式，而我國是采用既定量又定性的入罪模式。最后，在罪名設置和罪刑配置上進行比較研究，從而看出我國侵犯商業(yè)秘密罪的立法現(xiàn)狀與美國的差距。第三部分結合案例和上述的關于兩國在商業(yè)秘密刑事保護中存在的差異，提出完善我國商業(yè)秘密的刑事保護建議。主要從商業(yè)秘密的特征、“重大損失”認定的標準上、罪名的設置和刑罰的配置上提出完善的建議。
[Abstract]:As a kind of intangible property which can bring economic benefits and competitive advantages to the obligee, the importance of trade secret is becoming more and more obvious, and the infringement of trade secret has spread to all aspects of economic activities. At the same time, it is not only an infringement on the relevant right holders, but also a threat to the national economic security. Criminal protection of trade secrets has become a necessary means. The United States and China passed criminal legislation on 1996 and 1997 respectively to criminalize violations of trade secrets. It also shows that China and the United States have the same value judgment on the protection of trade secrets. Through the comparison between Rio Tinto's crime of infringing trade secrets and Zhong Dongfan's crime of economic espionage, this paper combines the legislative comparison between China and the United States on the crime of infringing on trade secrets. Some suggestions are put forward to improve the criminal protection of trade secrets in China. The article is divided into three parts. The first part introduces the facts of two typical cases and briefly expounds the problems caused by the violation of trade secrets. In the second part, from the angle of criminal legislation of protecting trade secret in our country and the United States, combined with the problems caused by the case, respectively, the following aspects are discussed: first, from the theory of trade secret protection, From the theory of contract law to the theory of tort law, it finally rises to the theory of property right, which lays the foundation for the criminal protection of trade secret. Secondly, the characteristics of trade secret are compared. The main difference between our country and the United States lies in the practical provisions. Thirdly, after analyzing the standard of this crime, the United States adopts the mode of qualitative incrimination. In our country, both quantitative and qualitative patterns of incrimination are adopted. Finally, a comparative study is carried out on the establishment of charges and the allocation of crime and punishment. The third part combines the case and the above differences between the two countries in the criminal protection of trade secrets. The author puts forward some suggestions to improve the criminal protection of trade secrets in China, mainly from the aspects of the characteristics of trade secrets, the criteria for the determination of "heavy losses", the setting of charges and the allocation of penalties.
【學位授予單位】：黑龍江大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：D924.3

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 戴蓬;;論侵犯商業(yè)秘密案件中損失數(shù)額的認定[J];福建警察學院學報;2010年01期

2 劉妙香,白恒晶;美國《經濟間諜法》對商業(yè)秘密的超強度保護[J];法學雜志;2002年04期

3 李群英;由一起侵犯商業(yè)秘密案引發(fā)的法律思考[J];法學雜志;2002年04期

4 陳興良;;侵犯商業(yè)秘密罪的重大損失及數(shù)額認定[J];法律適用;2011年07期

5 孫利;;對肖日明侵犯商業(yè)秘密一案的法律分析[J];貴州警官職業(yè)學院學報(公安法治研究);2006年05期

6 趙秉志;劉志偉;劉科;;關于侵犯商業(yè)秘密罪立法完善的研討[J];人民檢察;2010年04期

7 譚瑞;;對侵犯商業(yè)秘密罪刑罰配置的理性思考[J];四川警官高等專科學校學報;2006年01期

8 左亞楠;;侵犯商業(yè)秘密罪中“重大損失”的認定[J];商品與質量;2011年S9期

9 陳龍鑫;;侵犯商業(yè)秘密犯罪現(xiàn)狀與立法完善——以力拓案為切入點[J];犯罪研究;2009年05期

10 王俊民;李飛;趙寧;;侵犯商業(yè)秘密罪若干問題三人談[J];中國刑事法雜志;2005年01期

相關重要報紙文章 前1條

1 本報記者 張龍;[N];中國企業(yè)報;2010年

相關博士學位論文 前1條

1 趙天紅;商業(yè)秘密的刑事保護研究[D];中國政法大學;2006年

本文編號：1601724