| In judicial practice,the criminal imputation of digital currency theft presents a dual imputation model of computer and theft.Theoretically,the two modes have their own applicable scenarios,but in practice,the application of the two modes has a certain logical contradiction,and there is a phenomenon of mistaken "hat".The main manifestations are(1)the same attribution of different behaviors;(2)Different imputation of the same behavior.It can be found that the following two factors are the root causes of this phenomenon: One is the dispute over the legal interest attribute of digital currency,which makes it difficult to identify the legal interest infringed by the theft of digital currency.The identification of infringement of legal interest is the logical starting point of the criminal imputation model.The dispute of the logical starting point naturally leads to the confusion of the application of the imputation model.Secondly,the criminal imputation of digital currency theft is rigidly applied to the imputation mode of stealing traditional network virtual property,which limits the applicable boundary of criminal imputation of digital currency theft to a certain extent.Influenced by the research opinions of Supreme People’s Court and the inherent mode of criminal responsibility for theft of traditional network virtual property,the protection of virtual property of our country is inclined to adopt the protection path of computer crime.As one of the virtual property,the criminal liability of digital currency is influenced by the protection path of virtual property.However,there are qualitative differences between digital currency and traditional network virtual property.The criminal imputation of digital currency theft is limited by the protection path of stealing traditional network virtual property.In view of the above problems,this paper determines the principle of priority protection of important legal interests.Firstly,it starts from the legal interest attribute of digital currency,further affirms its property attribute based on its data attribute,and clarifies its double legal interest attribute.Secondly,the digital currency is compared with the traditional network virtual property,pointing out that there are essential differences between them and they should be treated differently.Secondly,by limiting the influence scope of "research opinion" and reasonably expanding the scope of "property" in the criminal law,the criminal liability mode of virtual property theft should be expanded appropriately.In order to break the shackles of criminal imputation mode of stealing traditional network virtual property to the criminal imputation mode of digital currency theft,explore the appropriate mode of criminal imputation mode of digital currency theft.Finally,there should be a specific use of the pattern.At the level of conviction,through the reasonable division of digital currency theft behavior,the different situations in which digital currency theft infringes legal interests are clarified,and the application scenarios of the two liability modes are made clear by the comprehensive application of the principle of legal interest rank and the principle of punishment for several crimes,so as to ensure the logical consistency of the application of the criminal liability mode for digital currency theft.In terms of sentencing,due to the huge price fluctuations of digital currency,there is no unified price determination method,which makes the imputation mode of theft more and more questioned.But the judicial problem of determining the amount of crime should not become the shackle of realizing the value of criminal law.In this paper,the average method is proposed on the basis of repeatedly reviewing various identification methods.Firstly,the mode of assigning responsibility for theft of digital currency will not be shelved,and secondly,the punishment of theft of digital currency will not violate the principle of compatibility of crime and responsibility. |
