【摘要】：由于計算機技術(shù)的迅速普及并被廣泛運用于我們生活的方方面面,今天的社會早已變成了“天網(wǎng)恢恢”的網(wǎng)絡(luò)世紀。物聯(lián)網(wǎng)或“互聯(lián)網(wǎng)+”大數(shù)據(jù)時代的來臨,更使我們的全部生活與信息網(wǎng)絡(luò)緊緊聯(lián)系在一起。網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全乃是一個關(guān)系到國家安全、社會公共安全、國家和公民財產(chǎn)安全、個人生活以及信息安全的極其重大的社會問題,國家必須加大對信息網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全的保護力度。為了有效地管理網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全秩序,我國已經(jīng)先后出臺了諸多有關(guān)信息網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全管理的法律法規(guī),它們中的大多數(shù)具有行政法律法規(guī)性質(zhì),也包括有關(guān)刑法性質(zhì)的規(guī)定。但是客觀而言,我國原有立法并不足以有效地對繁紛復(fù)雜的網(wǎng)絡(luò)違法犯罪進行打擊與防范。有鑒于此,作為《刑法》第286條之一,《刑法修正案(九)》第28條新增設(shè)了拒不履行信息網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全管理義務(wù)罪。本文立足于傳統(tǒng)四要件對拒不履行信息網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全管理義務(wù)罪進行全面的解析,從而明確罪與非罪之間的界限。本文首先從犯罪的客體著手,在論證網(wǎng)絡(luò)空間具有公共屬性的基礎(chǔ)上,結(jié)合《刑法》286條之一的規(guī)定以及相關(guān)規(guī)范性文件,從而得出拒不履行信息網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全管理義務(wù)罪客體的具體內(nèi)涵;其次是對該罪的客觀方面進行分析,這也是本文的重點內(nèi)容。筆者通過與行政法、網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全法相銜接的方式,對監(jiān)管部門的范圍和責(zé)令采取改正措施拒不改正兩大客觀要素進行相關(guān)界定,尤其是對行政前置性規(guī)定的合理性做出判斷,并對違法信息大量傳播、用戶信息的含義和泄露、嚴重后果的理解、情節(jié)嚴重的把握進行量化分析,以達到出罪與入罪標準相對明確化的效果;再次是對該罪的犯罪主體從相關(guān)規(guī)范性文件的規(guī)定以及我國學(xué)界有關(guān)觀點的角度出發(fā),對網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供者的概念、分類以及與網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供商的區(qū)別著手,提出刑法意義上的網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供者應(yīng)當(dāng)分為網(wǎng)絡(luò)接入服務(wù)提供者、網(wǎng)絡(luò)內(nèi)容服務(wù)提供者、網(wǎng)絡(luò)平臺服務(wù)提供者;從次是對該罪主體的主觀方面進行分析,論證犯罪主體應(yīng)存有故意的主觀要素,并分析行為主體存在違法性認識錯誤的情況下不同的處理模式。最后是對該罪在實體上沒有犯罪未遂狀態(tài)、共犯責(zé)任模式以及程序上的管轄問題進行相關(guān)分析,從而能夠?qū)懿宦男行畔⒕W(wǎng)絡(luò)安全管理義務(wù)罪全面、詳細的論述。
[Abstract]:Due to the rapid popularization of computer technology and widely used in all aspects of our lives, today's society has become a network century. Internet of things or "Internet" big data era, more closely linked to all our life and information network. Network security is an extremely important social problem related to national security, social public security, national and citizen property security, personal life and information security. The state must strengthen the protection of information network security. In order to effectively manage the order of network security, China has issued many laws and regulations on information network security management, most of which have the nature of administrative laws and regulations, including the provisions of criminal law. But objectively speaking, the original legislation of our country is not enough to effectively crack down and prevent the numerous and complicated network crimes. In view of this, as one of the 286 article of the Criminal Law, Article 28 of the Criminal Law Amendment (9) adds the crime of refusing to fulfill the duty of information network security management. This article bases on the traditional four elements to refuse to fulfill the information network security management duty crime carries on the comprehensive analysis, thus clears the boundary between the crime and the non-crime. This paper begins with the object of crime, on the basis of demonstrating that cyberspace has public attributes, combining with the provisions of one of the 286 articles of the Criminal Law and related normative documents, The concrete connotation of the object of the crime of refusing to fulfill the obligation of information network security management is obtained. The second is the analysis of the objective aspects of the crime, which is also the focus of this article. By connecting with administrative law and network security law, the author defines the scope of regulatory department and the order to take corrective measures to refuse to correct the two objective elements, especially the rationality of administrative preemptive provisions. And carry on the quantitative analysis to the illegal information massive dissemination, the user information meaning and the leakage, the serious consequence understanding, the plot serious grasp carries on the quantification analysis, in order to achieve the crime and the incriminate standard relatively clear effect; Thirdly, from the point of view of the relevant normative documents and the related viewpoints of the academic circles of our country, the author sets about the concept, classification and the difference between the network service provider and the network service provider. The network service provider in criminal law should be divided into network access service provider, network content service provider and network platform service provider. This paper analyzes the subjective aspects of the subject of the crime, demonstrates that the subject of the crime should have intentional subjective elements, and analyzes the different treatment models of the subject in the case of illegality. Finally, the author makes a related analysis on the criminal attempt state, the mode of accomplice responsibility and the jurisdiction of procedure, so that the crime of refusing to fulfill the obligation of information network security management can be discussed comprehensively and in detail.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2018
【分類號】：D924.3

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 謝望原;;論拒不履行信息網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全管理義務(wù)罪[J];中國法學(xué);2017年02期

2 敬力嘉;;論拒不履行網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全管理義務(wù)罪——以網(wǎng)絡(luò)中介服務(wù)者的刑事責(zé)任為中心展開[J];政治與法律;2017年01期

3 葛立剛;;網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)商不作為刑事責(zé)任的邊界[J];西南政法大學(xué)學(xué)報;2016年06期

4 劉艷紅;;無罪的快播與有罪的思維——“快播案”有罪論之反思與批判[J];政治與法律;2016年12期

5 劉艷紅;;網(wǎng)絡(luò)時代言論自由的刑法邊界[J];中國社會科學(xué);2016年10期

6 邱賽蘭;;拒不履行信息網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全管理義務(wù)罪構(gòu)成特征探析[J];經(jīng)濟師;2016年10期

7 劉憲權(quán);;網(wǎng)絡(luò)犯罪的刑法應(yīng)對新理念[J];政治與法律;2016年09期

8 王華偉;;網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供者的刑法責(zé)任比較研究[J];環(huán)球法律評論;2016年04期

9 孫國祥;;違法性認識錯誤的不可避免性及其認定[J];中外法學(xué);2016年03期

10 羅勇;;論“網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供者”的法律界定——以中日比較為中心[J];學(xué)術(shù)交流;2016年06期

，

本文編號：2430057