帮信罪：虚拟货币交易采用现金方式能否推定主观明知

Author Zeng Jie's lawyer Lin Anqi's introduction: Does it mean that the actor knows that it is stolen money and thus meets the subjective knowledge requirements of the crime of helping the letter? From the perspective of the crime of helping the letter and its related judicial interpretation, it should return to the essence of this problem. Is the cash transaction of virtual currency obviously contrary to the market rules and belongs to an obviously abnormal transaction mode? If cash is in the virtual currency transaction, Transaction is obviously more difficult than online transaction, for example, if the two parties are far away from each other, it is obviously abnormal. If cash transaction is not obviously difficult than online transaction, for example, if the two parties are relatives and friends in the same city, it is not obviously abnormal. Of course, it should also be comprehensively determined whether the text virtual currency cash transaction is obviously abnormal according to the specific circumstances of the case, such as telecom fraud, online gambling and other virtual currency obtained by using information network criminal activities, which is called stolen money collection in this paper. In the process of dealing with criminals, the buyer realized the transformation of stolen money into cash. The buyer provided payment and settlement assistance to criminals. Article 2 of the Criminal Law stipulates that providing payment and settlement assistance to others knowing that they use information networks to commit crimes constitutes a serious crime of helping information networks, that is, helping the letter. Therefore, the defense focus of the crime of buying virtual currency is whether the actor knows that the purchased virtual currency is stolen money. the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate on handling illegal activities Interpretation of several issues concerning the application of laws in criminal cases such as information network to help information network criminal activities, hereinafter referred to as interpretation, Article 11 stipulates six specific situations of presumption of knowledge, the third of which is that the transaction price or method is obviously abnormal, so whether buying coins by cash transaction can be presumed as subjective knowledge or not depends on whether the cash transaction of virtual currency belongs to obviously abnormal transaction methods. The transaction of virtual currency is divided into intra-station transactions and Off-site trading, that is, off-site trading of exchange trading, such as online payment trading after negotiation by using chat tools such as WeChat, also includes face-to-face cash trading discussed in this paper. Compared with on-site trading and online trading, face-to-face cash trading is more troublesome. For example, the trading of virtual currency in different places or in bulk requires a large amount of cash, but it also has certain advantages. In China, virtual currency is characterized as a virtual commodity, and its business cannot be denied because of its virtuality. Commodity transaction attribute cash transaction is a common and safer transaction method in small commodity transactions, and there is no obvious abnormality in the cash transaction method. In practice, some case-handling agencies will think that the behavior of buying and selling virtual currency by the troublesome face-to-face cash transaction is an obvious abnormality in the explanation, so it is presumed that the behavior knows that it is stolen money, but the explanation given by the highest inspection is the transaction method. Obviously, it does not conform to the market rules, so it cannot be determined that the transaction mode is obviously abnormal simply by the conversion of virtual currency and cash, and it should return to its essence. Is this conversion inconsistent with the market rules, such as efficient, convenient and safe? For example, the cost of face-to-face transactions between the two parties in different places is high, or the amount of virtual currency transactions is large, with tens of millions of cash, but both parties still adopt the cash transaction method, which does not conform to the market trading rules. At this time, it can be presumed that the actor knows that it is stolen money, but for example, the transaction is double. Fang is a relative and friend in the same city, and the face-to-face cash transaction for tens of thousands of yuan at this time has not created resistance to the transaction itself, or this resistance is minimal. It cannot be concluded that the transaction violates the market rules, nor can it be presumed that knowing that from the actual case, the virtual currency cash transaction does not necessarily point to the perpetrator knowing the case number, checking the basic case of a criminal prosecution, and the criminal suspect will help others to realize the illegal money of online fraud through virtual currency, so that the non-prosecuted person can meet his own requirements. Personal identity information is registered with the Firecoin Exchange account and bound with a personal bank card to be provided to the fraud gang. The annual Firecoin account is used to sell more than 10,000 coins. The bank account receives more than 10,000 yuan, gives the cash to the custody, and gives the cash to the fraud gang in Wuhan or Shenzhen. Among them, Yao Moumou is arranged to take a high-speed train from Wuhan to Shenzhen to deliver cash of about 10,000 yuan to the fraud gang. The case turns out that the facts of the suspected crime are unclear, and the evidence is insufficient and does not meet the conditions for prosecution. Reasons for prosecution The evidence in this case can prove that the defendant who was not prosecuted was arranged to provide his own identity information in the first half of last year, registered with Huobi.com account, bound with a bank card, and provided it for use and was arranged to deliver cash to Liu's team. However, the evidence in this case can't prove that knowing that Liu and others committed cyber crime activities, it can't prove that providing bank accounts to collect and transfer funds is the proceeds of cyber crime. The reasons are as follows: At present, the latest transaction of the account involved was not found before the first deposit of the four fraud platforms involved. The law proves that the money in the account involved is the proceeds of the crime of the four fraud platforms involved. I don't know that the members of the fraud gang have no direct or indirect communication arrangements. When registering the Huobi. com account with personal identity information and binding the personal bank card, they didn't explicitly or implicitly arrange the use. Yao Moumou withdrew huge amounts of cash because the purpose and purpose of withdrawing cash from Wuhan were not unique and exclusive, and it was impossible to prove that he benefited from it. There is a situation that virtual currency is realized as advanced and transported. From the reason that the procuratorate does not prosecute, it is impossible to determine the helper's subjective knowledge simply by the conversion of virtual currency and cash, because the purpose and purpose of cash are not unique and exclusive, and do not directly point to illegal and criminal activities. Similarly, in the case of virtual currency trading being accused of helping the letter, it is impossible to determine the helper's subjective knowledge simply by the conversion of virtual currency and cash, and the judgment of the helper's knowing should be comprehensive. In the understanding and application of the applicable law in handling criminal cases such as illegal use of information network to help information network criminal activities, the Supreme People's Court pointed out that after research, it is considered that the determination of subjective knowledge of the crime of helping information network criminal activities should be combined with the general people's cognitive level and the cognitive ability of the actor, whether the relevant behavior violates the prohibition provisions of the law, whether the actor performs management duties, evades supervision or evades investigation, whether he has been punished for similar behavior, and whether the actor's confession and excuse are required to make a comprehensive judgment. 比特币今日价格行情网_okx交易所app_永续合约_比特币怎么买卖交易_虚拟币交易所平台

注册有任何问题请添加 微信：MVIP619 拉你进入群

文章转载注明 网址：https://netpsp.com/?id=61967