Qualitative Analysis Of The Crime Of Changing QR Codes Under The New Payment

With the development of science and technology,mobile payment service is more and more popular.The third-party payment service has gradually replaced the traditional cash transaction and credit card transaction.People are getting used to the new payment method of scanning code to trade with each other.Although the new mode of payment brings a lot of convenience to people,it also brings the criminal risk of the new type of property crime.For example,in the last two years,the case of stealing qr codes has attracted much attention.The actor took advantage of merchants do not pay attention to secretly exchange merchants received two-dimensional code,resulting in customers scanning code to pay for goods into the human account.Such a simple and true case has caused a lot of disputes in the field of criminal law in China.The main content of the dispute is about how to determine the nature of the theft of two-dimensional code.There are two different views on the theory of theft and the theory of fraud.Theft said that there is a crime of theft to receive the principal said and theft indirect principal said,fraud said according to the internal fraud and victim is the same person,divided into the general fraud said(also known as the two between the fraud said)and the special fraud said(also known as triangle fraud said).This paper takes some typical cases as the research perspective,carefully studies the existing theoretical research results in China,and through the analysis of the elements of the crime of theft and fraud,believes that the crime of stealing the qr code should be characterized as the crime of fraud.The reasons are as follows:first,the actor carried out the illegal act of stealing(covering)merchant collection two-dimensional code,resulting in the deceived customer into a wrong understanding,based on the wrong understanding of the deceived customer disposed of their own property,the actor obtained property.Its behavior is consistent with the objective elements of the crime of fraud,the behavior of the doer take money is more consistent with the crime of fraud "cheat" rather than the crime of theft "steal",the doer finally get property is not just because of stealing(exchange)two-dimensional code,the doer take money results should also be combined with the voluntary disposal of customers.Second,the merchant has never obtained the possession of money from beginning to end,the theft process is the actor destroy others to the possession of property to establish a new possession of the process.No matter before or after the customer sweeps the code to pay,the customer occupies before scanning the code,the actor occupies after scanning the code,cannot because the price should belong to the business and affirm that the business occupies this price,should belong to the business occupies and belong to the business occupies are two different things completely,so the actor does not constitute the crime of theft to the business.Third,in the case of stealing the two-dimensional code by cheating and the victim is a customer,other points of view from the final result of the damage identified as the victim merchants,its logic violation of the criminal law focus on behavior center,there are certain flaws.Fourthly,the behavior of customers who are cheated by the actor and then scan the code for payment belongs to the disciplinary action required by the crime of fraud,and customers have disciplinary action and disciplinary consciousness.To sum up,the actor for two-dimensional code invasion of property behavior should be characterized as a crime of fraud.