Abstract: Non-fungible tokens (NFTs), as a novel form of rights, fall under the purview of both civil and criminal law protection. The recognition of the civil nature of NFT rights serves as an intrinsic foundation and external boundary for discerning criminal interests. In the discourse surrounding the civil attributes of NFT rights, the divergence in perspectives stemming from the “new rights theory” has engendered ambiguity concerning the delineation of NFT rights’ substance and scope. The “creditor’s rights theory”, which views NFTs as the object of network technology service contracts, tends to overlook the disparities in control, transfer rules, and remedies between NFTs and conventional creditor’s rights. In the era of digitalization, property subjects extend beyond physical assets. Right-holders exercise exclusive control over NFTs, rendering them subjects of property rights. NFTs possess economic value and practical dominion, thus qualifying as property interests protected under criminal law. Illegitimate acquisition of NFTs, since it does not compromise data security interests, does not amount to a data-related offense. NFTs symbolize functional aspects of data and serve as carriers of intellectual property value, thereby distinguishing them from subjects of intellectual property offenses. Conversely, the illicit procurement of NFTs results in the nullification of original ownership, establishing a novel regime of control, which aligns with the construct of property interest theft.