刑法解释之道与“涉互联网犯罪”之罪名认定

The Doctrines of Criminal Explanation and the Charges Conviction of Cyber Crime

在"涉互联网犯罪"个案罪名认定困惑乃至混乱之下,刑法解释便构成了当然的解题之道。本相性刑法解释、穿透性刑法解释、衡平性刑法解释是"涉互联网犯罪"个案罪名认定的有效之道。本相性刑法解释、穿透性刑法解释、衡平性刑法解释,最终都是"文义相符性"与"价值相符性"或"形式相符性"与"实质相符性"的兼顾或结合的刑法解释,从而都是形式理性与实质理性兼顾或结合的刑法解释。沿着"由内而外"的路径,在"三位一体"之中,"本相性"、"穿透性"和"衡平性"不仅丰富了刑法解释的既有理论,而且能够赋予刑法解释以"深度有效性",从而使得个案罪名认定更加积极稳妥地体现维护秩序和保障权利的刑法基本价值,同时能够抑制"涉互联网犯罪"的"立法冲动"。

Under the confusion situation in the determination of the charges of "cyber crimes", the interpretation of criminal law constitutes a natural way to solve the problem. Criminal explanation of prototype, penetrativity and equitability are effective doctrines of individual case of cyber crime. Criminal explanation of prototype, penetrativity and equitability are finally criminal explanations with combination and consideration of “semantic conformity” and “value conformity” or “formal conformity” and “essential conformity”, thus criminal explanations with combination and consideration of formal rationality and substantive rationality. Along the path “inside out”, within “trinity”, “prototype” “penetrativity” and “equitability” could not only enrich the pre-existing theories of criminal explanation, but also endow “profound effectiveness” to criminal explanation. Based on that, conviction of charge of individual case could more positively and appropriately reflect criminal basic values of order preserving and rights protection, meanwhile it could restrain the “legislative implusion” of cyber crime.