Study On The Criminal Applicability Of Online Overseas Purchasing Agency

Since2007, online overseas purchasing agency has been widened with theincreasing rate of import tariff. The development of E-commerce platform in ourcountry promotes more and more businessmen on Taobao to engage in agented inonline overseas purchasing agency objectively. Online overseas purchasing agency onone hand meets the needs of Chinese, on the other hand it promotes the developmentof E-commerce platform. For example, gong reporting channel needs high import tax,but going no reporting channel need not paying tariff. Besides, the regulating law forit is insufficient for a long time. As a result, there is a handful of criminal cases on it.This case as the first reported criminal case of online overseas purchasing agencyhas been widespread concerned in our country. Legal theory and practice on how todeal with the case have different points on it. Crime or no crime, and the existence ofcriminal intent of smuggling tax when Lee go "no reporting channel", as well as themeasurement of punishment is appropriate or not after Lee’s constituting SmugglingCommon Goods. As the first reported criminal case of online overseas purchasingagency, the dispute of this case concerns the legal nature and criminal sentencing ofsome people’s business on this behavior, and it also affects overall development ofthis industry. Therefore, to study the criminal law aspects of the case, has sometheoretical and practical value.Expect forward, the main body includes four parts:The first part is the basic circumstances of the case. This part includes: the first isbrief summary. The second is that the introduce of the case——giving a briefintroduction of the process of Lee and her accomplice how to smuggle tariff and thejudgment of court. The third is that the focused disagreements and disputes of the case.By inducing disagreement, the case presents the different focuses gradually: one of itis the nature of Lee’s behavior. If you think that Lee engaged in agented purchasingabroad online is a new kind of state Internet era of e-commerce, then it is entirelylegal; if you think Lee’s behavior is beyond the regulatory norms of the customs laws and regulations, it may be an administrative offense; if you think that Lee’s behaviorhas violated "Criminal Law" provisions on smuggling common goods or articles, thecriminal case should be handled. Second, Lee’s subjective aspects of behaviorwhether exists criminal intent in this case. Lee denied the existence of her intent ofsmuggling tariff. But the opposite view persists there is sufficient condition indicatesLee has criminal intent. Third, Lee’s sentencing is appropriate. If strict accordancewith China’s "Criminal Law" One hundred and53of the sentencing standards,according to the trial and retrial court finds the amount of tax evasion Lee, Lee’s trialand sentencing retrial indeed legitimate. But if we consider the "temper justice withmercy," the criminal policy of "co-judge with" principles of justice and the trial andretrial of Lee’s sentencing is too heavy.The second part analyses of the legal issues. First, whether the online overseaspurchasing agency laws to regulate the behavior. By finding customs supervision ofthe laws and regulations we know that online overseas purchasing agency behavior isnot part of the legislative gaps, but there are a number of relevant prohibitions.Second, feature of the criminal intent of smuggling goods. According to the relevantjudicial interpretations of the subjective intent of the provisions of smuggling, weknow that it includes "knowledge" and "constructive knowledge". The third is the fourelements of the crime smuggling common goods. The fourth is the measurement ofpunishment of court. From the perspective of the criminal policy influence andcredibility in the judicial administration, we know trial and retrial is too heavy.The third part is the analysis and conclusions of the case. This partcomprehensively discusses view on online overseas purchasing agency whether islegislative blank or not, the subjective aspect of Lee, and Lee could constitute a crimeof smuggling common goods or not, and whether the trial and sentencing retrial offour focus overweight.Part IV is revelation study on the case. First, to standardize online overseaspurchasing agency, we need improve the legislation on electricity providers; while toadapt to the growing domestic consumer demand, Customs should also reduce theexcess on passengers carrying personal goods of tariff rates. Second, in "Criminal Law", the crime of smuggling common goods amounts criteria should be based onconsideration of the country’s economic development and the "Criminal Law" toadapt to the requirements of criminal culpability should be increased. Third, injudicial practice, the judge should also be appropriate to relax on the sentencing of thecrime situation in accordance with the development of online overseas purchasingagency.