Qualitative Research On Initial Coin Offering In Criminal Law

Nowadays,the application of block chain technology is mainly centered on virtual currency field.Initial Coin Offering(ICO),which takes virtual currency as the target of crime,is a disorder in block chain industry.However,no response has been made by legislation or judicial practice.How to define the nature of ICO in criminal law is an essential issue to be solved.This article is themed on defining the nature of ICO in criminal law,with ICO being comprehensively analyzed from the perspective of Ether and Hero Coin.Furthermore,in order to deepen the study of ICO,this article also discusses another issue: if the investor started to doubt the authenticity of the ICO project,under this circumstances,could the cognition errors of facts be constituted or not? This article is divided into four parts:The first part is the introduction of the case.This part includes the cause of the case,the description of the case and the controversial views of the case.The article gives a detailed description of how the defendant deceived the investors with the block chain technology and how was the crime revealed.Also,this part sums up the focus of the dispute in this case.The second part is the legal analysis.At first,this section analyzes the nature of virtual currency.Based on Political Economics,a conclusion is drawn in this section that virtual currency is a specific commodity which can be defined as property in criminal law.Secondly,this section analyzes the factors of constituting the crime of issuing shares and bonds without permission and the crime of fund-raising fraud.Thirdly,this section discusses the question of whether the victim’s doubt affects the constitution of the cognition errors of facts,and introduces the opinions of the victim doctrine theory.At last,this section analyzes the factors of constituting the crime of illegal business operation.The third part is the detailed analysis and the conclusion of the case.This part draws a conclusion that the defendant can not be accused of the crime of issuing shares and bonds without permission or the crime of illegal business operation,and suggests that the defendant should be accused of the crime of fund-raising fraud.In addition,this article denies the opinion that the victim’s doubt can prevent the constitution of the cognition errors of facts.In conclusion,this article draws a conclusion that the defendant should be accused of the crime of fund-raising fraud.The fourth part is the lessons learned from this case.In order to solve the problem of thecriminal amount in the crime of fund-raising fraud,the author suggests that with the help of the third party inspection institution,the price of virtual currency and the criminal amount can be justly evaluated.When it comes to the crime in block chain technology area,the author suggests interpreting the criminal law in a material way,so as to regulate the crime in block chain technology area.Also,in order to reduce the crimes in block chain technology area,there should be an expanded application based on block chain technology.Moreover,the knowledge of the block chain technology should be widely popularized.