This article critically examines the justification of copyright infringement crime on several grounds that trail beyond criminal dogmatic such as criminal theory, legal theory and legal philosophy. To be justified as criminal rule of law, the law should regulate substantive crime and be enacted as ultima ratio. Throughout the process of examination that decides whether the law regulates substantive crime, the theory of legal interest, especially theory of Personal legal interest and theory of intersubjective legal interest, offers rational grounds why copyright as both property right and moral right comes under need-to-be protected legal interest. But, still, it seems to be remote for copyright infringement crime to be recognized as the justified one. That is because of the intersubjective structure and paradox that copyright itself contains. In other words, the copyright is formed in spiral circulation throughout the process of incessant switching positions between creators and users. Copyright’s paradox means as follows: on the one hand, copyright contributes to the production of works by offering motives to create, but on the other hand, it disturbs the formation of works as a whole by providing the right to only restricted classes of users. Therefore, the criminal legal policy needs to be practiced in a way to break out of the dilemma. Regarding fair use as an ordinary social life which is not even considered as a minor infringement, and applying criminal law as ultima ratio, not prima ratio can perform as examples to achieve the copyright law’s ultimate goal: copyright legal system is designed to promote culture and industry that enriches author’s creation and user’s enjoyment of works.