A Study On The Judicial Determination Of Internet Infringement Under The New Payment Method

In recent years,as the socialist market economy thrives,the continuous advancement of science and technology has increased the frequent use of the Internet in the financial service industry.New payment methods have emerged,such as Alipay,We Chat Pay,and mobile banking.Thanks to its many merits: convenience,quickness as well as efficiency,APP has played a positive role in the production and life of the people.While,it also bring about some risks and problems.Compared with the legal relationship among traditional legal payment methods,the one among new payment methods with its own unique connotation,forms of expression mainly in third-party payment,independence,and convenience,has evolved from two-party legal behavior into a three-party legal behavior.It is the innovation of payment methods that has led to the novelty of behavior types,which makes the judicial determination of the crime of Internet infringement under the new payment methods encounter many difficult problems.The new problems caused by different types of behavior under the new payment method not only have a certain impact on the traditional theories of crime of infringing upon property,but also lead to inconsistent judgments on the cases in judicial practice,mainly forming three kinds of crimes: “larceny”,“fraud” and “credit card fraud”.The determination of a crime should also be based on the differences in behavior.The first type is about the illegal use of other people’s payment accounts.On the premise that the nature of third-party payment is a new payment method of credit card,it is possible to be "cheated" in the intelligent third-party payment platform.Therefore,it can be concluded that the third party payment platform falls into the wrong cognition when the perpetrator commits the crime of infringing upon property.Based on the wrong cognition,the third party payment platform implements the behavior of property disposal,which causes the victim to lose property and the perpetrator to obtain property.Therefore,it is more suitable to be considered as the crime of credit card fraud.The second type is about the behavior of setting up false links to infringe upon property.According to different ways of behavior,this type is further divided into: setting up false links to obtain other people’s payment account passwords behavior and setting up false links to instruct victims to carry out “self damage” behavior.The former continues to follow the conviction logic of illegally using other people’s payment account as “crime of credit card fraud”,while the latter,because the victim lacking “punishment consciousness” instructed by the actor has transferred property,it is supposed to be recognized as “larceny”.The third type is about the behavior of using QR codes to invade property.This behavior is mainly through changing the direction of QR code payment channels to complete the behavior of infringing property,which directly infringes on the expected ownership of the merchant or the property right of the original possessor,and it should be identified as “larceny”.Because of the new payment modes,the cyber crime of infringing upon property mainly acts on the network space and realizes the criminal purpose through the network technology.At the same time,the network itself has many characteristics such as concealment,extension and informatization,which lead to many disputes in the judicial determination of the special form of crime.The form of preparation and suspension in the new payment modes are the same as ones in traditional crime of invading property.In terms of the accomplishment and non-accomplishment crime,there are mainly “transfer theory”,“control theory”,“out of control theory”,“out of control and control theory”,“double out of control theory” and other theories.Under the new modes of payment,whether from the perspective of criminal constituent elements or from the perspective of criminal policy,the theory of “out of control” is more in line with the classification standard of accomplishment and non-accomplishment crime.In the identification of accomplices in cybercriminal crimes,the content of “presumed accomplice intent” is included in the scope of determination.At the same time,the “main role” criterion is adopted to divide the principal and subordinate criminals.When it comes to the judgment of the abettor in the crime of infringing upon property on the Internet,it will be mainly analyzed from the four aspects of subjective intention,objective behavior,abettor content and abettor object.In terms of the quantity of crimes,the crime of false usage of money and the crime of violating personalinformation of citizens shall be punished by multiple crimes,and other acts that have no factual connection with payment platform information and credit card information shall be deemed as implicated offenders,which shall be charged with felonies.