在未成年人犯罪数量总体呈上升趋势的现实背景下，未成年人犯罪记录封存制度作为一种正向激励措施得到广泛的适用。2022年《关于未成年人犯罪记录封存的实施办法》的颁布，对封存条件进行了进一步的细化，充分保障了未成年罪犯的发展利益。研究发现，封存制度在适用中存在“重罪封存”与“轻罪公开”的奖惩失当现象。之所以存在上述现象主要是因为我国未成年人犯罪记录封存制度适用条件的疏漏。一方面，判断是否适用未成年人犯罪记录封存制度的依据是未成年罪犯的人身危险性和社会危害性，立法者将封存制度适用的条件设置为一定的年龄标准和刑罚标准，通过年龄和刑罚对未成年罪犯的危险性进行推定，满足了危险性实质判断的基本需求，具有一定合理性，也是制定法规范化表达的必然现象。但是，由于不同个体之间心理成熟程度差距大且已然刑罚与社会危害性并不必然重合，简单的数字分层无法准确地分离惩治与保护的对象。另一方面，刑事司法环节量刑信息的不足以及执法层面的僵化适用也共同地消解了封存制度适用条件的目的。在司法环节，由于量刑信息范围随着刑事司法程序的推进而限缩且未成年人的量刑活动往往受到成年司法工作的影响，使得量刑过程出现量刑信息的疏漏和量刑过程的不独立的问题。在制度执行环节，对未成年罪犯的人身危险性的后续考察工作上也存在不足，考验期和考察工作等负担性义务的缺失，可能导致某些未成年罪犯在记录封存后频频再犯，违背封存制度设立的初衷。

因此，为保障封存制度最大程度发挥维护社会稳定与保护未成年罪犯合法权益的功效，对适用条件进行重新审视，在规范层面和执行层面进行弹性调整不失为一种有益的尝试。

In the context of the overall increase in the number of crimes committed by minors, the system of sealing the criminal records of minors has been widely applied as a positive incentive measure. 2022 saw the promulgation of the Implementation Measures on the sealing of criminal records of minors, which further refined the conditions for sealing and fully protected the development interests of minor offenders. The study found that there is a mismatch between the "sealing of felonies" and the "disclosure of misdemeanours" in the application of the sealing system. This phenomenon is mainly due to the omission of the conditions for the application of the juvenile record sealing system in China. On the one hand, the basis for judging whether or not to apply the system of sealing the criminal records of minors is the personal danger and social harm of juvenile offenders. It is also an inevitable phenomenon in the normative expression of the law. However, due to the wide gap in psychological maturity between different individuals and the fact that the existing penalties and social dangerousness do not necessarily coincide, a simple numerical stratification cannot accurately separate the objects of punishment and protection. On the other hand, the lack of information on sentencing at the criminal justice level and the rigid sealing at the law enforcement level also combine to defeat the purpose of the conditions for the application of the sealing system. At the judicial level, the scope of sentencing information is limited as the criminal justice process progresses and the sentencing activities of minors are often influenced by the work of the adult judiciary, resulting in a lack of sentencing information and a lack of independence in the sentencing process. The absence of burdensome obligations such as testing periods and inspection work may lead to the frequent recidivism of some juvenile offenders after the sealing of their records, defeating the original purpose of the sealing system.

Therefore, in order to ensure that the sealing system maximises its effectiveness in maintaining social stability and protecting the legitimate rights and interests of juvenile offenders, it would be useful to re-examine the applicable conditions and make flexible adjustments at the normative and enforcement levels.