Research on the Judicial Application of the Crime of Counterfeiting Registered Trademarks

近年来，作为商品标识的商标在经济快速发展的同时受到越来越多的关注。在侵犯商标权犯罪中，由于现行法律规范及司法解释对假冒注册商标罪的犯罪对象规定不够明确，司法适用中存在适用缓刑不统一、罪名认定存在差异等问题，《刑法修正案(十一)》将“服务商标”这一犯罪对象明确规定在刑法条文中，并提高了第二档的最高刑，足以说明司法机关对该罪适用的重视。以问题为导向，基于假冒注册商标罪的多发性和犯罪对象认定、入罪标准等争议性问题，有必要对本罪在司法实践中存在的问题进行探究。目前，“服务商标”入刑后，关于本罪的犯罪客体还未形成一致意见，服务商标“使用”的认定等还缺乏具体而统一的标准，本罪与其他犯罪的界限尤其是司法实践中罪名的认定仍存在不同的声音，“同案不同判”现象并非个例的问题。本文将就司法实践中的案例着手，总结梳理司法实践中存在的问题，分析假冒注册商标罪的司法适用困境，以期为司法实践提供帮助。In recent years, trademarks as product identifiers have received increasing attention in the context of rapid economic development. In the crime of trademark infringement, due to the lack of clear provisions on the criminal objects of counterfeiting registered trademarks in current legal norms and judicial interpretations, there are problems such as inconsistent application of probation and differences in the determination of charges in judicial application. The Eleventh Amendment to the Criminal Law clearly stipulates the criminal object of “service trademark” in the criminal law provisions and increases the maximum punishment of the second tier, which is sufficient to demonstrate the importance that the judicial authorities attach to the application of this crime. It is necessary to explore the problems existing in the judicial practice of the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks, based on the frequent occurrence of the crime and controversial issues such as the identification of criminal objects and the criteria for criminalization, with a problem-oriented approach. At present, after the criminalization of “service trademarks”, there is no consensus on the object of this crime, and there is a lack of specific and unified standards for determining the “use” of service trademarks. There are still different opinions on the boundary between this crime and other crimes, especially in the determination of charges in judicial practice. The phenomenon of “different judgments for the same case” is not an isolated issue. This article will start with cases in judicial practice, summarize and sort out the problems existing in judicial practice, and analyze the judicial application difficulties of the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks, in order to provide assistance for judicial practice.