The criminal responsibility of the enhanced soldier is a subject that is part of the need to reflect on the legal consequences of some military technologies. Legal anticipation is essential in order to allow technologies to be accompanied. This would prevent the development of technologies, often requiring significant resources, which would subsequently be restricted or even legally rejected. The study of the enhanced soldier cannot be considered without taking into account the consequences it may have. One of the consequences of the use of new technologies is the issue of responsibility. The aim is to identify 'who' would bear the responsibility, in the current state of the French law, and what consequences this would have for the roles of each party. It is therefore necessary to study the consequences of the implementation of means of enhancement in the armed forces on the law of liability. This raises the question of determining the individual responsibility of the soldier who will be the beneficiary of the enhancement, in other words the holder and the recipient. Once the soldier has been enhanced, the risks to himself or to others do not disappear. There remains the possibility that the proposed means of enhancement may not only be harmful to the soldier's health, but may also cause harm to civilian individuals. Such damage could give rise to individual criminal responsibility of the soldier. This would be the case, for example, if the enhanced soldier caused damage in which the enhancement played a decisive role. The enhanced soldier could use the means of enhancement to commit offences off duty (in the case of irreversible enhancements or enhancements diverted from their original purpose) or during the performance of his mission, for example in military operations. This article deals with the consequences of enhancement on the criminal responsibility of the soldier in case of intentional offence, according to French law. In particular, it examines the legal implications of an impaired or abolition of discernment caused by the enhancement on the engagement of such individual responsibility. It also stresses the need to add to this individual dimension of responsibility the possibility of engaging the administrative responsibility of the Army, which plays a decision-making role in the acquisition of technological means and their operational use.