Research On The Crime Of Helping Sending Telecom Fraud Information

The development of the information network has led to the continuous display of new characteristics of cybercrime in the field of criminal law.The danger of helping to send telecommunication fraud information in this type of crime even exceeds the execution of the principal offender being helped.In this regard,the "Criminal Law Amendment <9>" added Article 287 "bis" to provide an independent crime standard for some assisting acts,which separates it from the general punishment for assisting acts under the traditional accomplice system.limit.However,Article 287-1 also uses the Internet as a tool or means to provide assistance to others’ illegal and criminal activities,which to a certain extent makes the characterization and legal application of some preparatory behaviors and assistance behaviors in cybercrime fall into Dilemma.At present,there are two main problems in practice: one is the qualitative problem of helping to send telecommunications fraud information;the other is the difficult problem of the behavior in practice;such as helping the perpetrator’s subjective understanding of whether the element is "knowingly",What kind of understanding should be made about the “violation and crime” of the known object,and how should the behavior of helping the perpetrator meet the standard of “serious circumstances”? In addition,how should the online platform implement telecommunications network fraud? The identification standards for the principal and accomplices of unit staff,etc.This article is different from the previous purely theoretical analytical papers,but takes the case of Tan Zhangyu and others who helped send telecommunication fraud information as an example.The case is included in the topic,and the case analysis and theoretical research are combined to analyze the criminal problem of helping to send telecommunication fraud information.After sorting out and analyzing basic theories,legislative legitimacy,and practical problems such as "preparatory behavior implementation" and "help behavior rectification",the author believes that the key to the correct punishment of the act of helping to send telecommunication fraud information lies in distinguishing the second One hundred and eighty-seven "One" and "Two".The similarity between the two crimes lies not only in the similarity of the objective behavior types and subjective knowledge and will elements,but also in the crime situation that must meet the“serious circumstances” standard;the difference between the two crimes lies in the legislative theoretical basis and the evidence or substantive evidence that constitutes the crime.There are differences in requirements.When the principal offender being helped constitutes a crime,the perpetrator providing assistance should decide whether to exclude the application of the first two crimes based on the principle of imaginary coincidence based on the circumstances and the severity of the sentence.In the characterization of Tan Zhangyu and others’ behavior,the author believes that it is more reasonable to be punished with fraud;the level of awareness of "knowingly" should reach the standard of "certain knowledge + should know";the scope of "illegal crime" should include criminal acts and failure to achieve Corresponding crime standards but stipulated in the sub-clauses;the determination of "serious circumstances" should be comprehensively evaluated from the perspective of subjective and objective crimes;network platforms should adhere to the standard of punishability of neutral helping behaviors when implementing the helping behaviors specified in this article,And deal with the different ways accordingly.When a unit commits a crime,the standard of substantive role shall be adhered to for the determination of the principal and accomplices of the staff of the unit.