A Case Study Of Fraudulent Use Of Others’ "Ant Credit Pay"

With the rapid development of Internet technology and market economy,traditional criminal means gradually shift to virtual cyberspace,and cyber crimes spread rapidly,making it more difficult for judicial organs to characterize them.Taking the act of fraudulently using others’ "ant flower buds" "as an example,there is no unified conclusion among the judgment of the court,the prosecution opinions of the procuratorate,the defense opinions of the defendant and his defenders,and scholars on the characterization of fraudulently using others’ " ant flower buds ".The main controversial charges are theft,credit card fraud,contract fraud,fraud and loan fraud.The main points of controversy are the legal nature of ant flower garden,whether the service provider of ant flower garden is a financial institution,the actual victim is Alipay account holder or ant flower garden service provider,whether Alipay platform can be cheated,etc.Through case search and three typical cases of fraudulent use of other people’s ants’ flower beds,this paper shows the conflict behavior of the court in the same case but different judgment results,leads to the dilemma of such cases in judicial practice,and then analyzes the conviction of fraudulent use of other people’s ants’ flower beds in criminal law.Through a brief analysis of the data of similar cases and three typical cases,this paper reflects that the specific problems encountered by judicial organs in the trial of such cases are that the legal nature of the service providers of ant flower buds is not clear,there is no consensus on whether the ant flower buds belong to credit cards,and it is not clear whether the ultimate victim is the Alipay account holder or the service provider of ant flower buds.Combined with the conflict between judicial practice and legal theory on the characterization of fraudulent use of others’ ant flower beds,the author concludes that the ant flower beds service provider is not a financial institution,the ant flower beds are not credit cards,the victim of the behavior of the actor opening others’ ant flower beds service under false pretence is the ant flower beds service provider,and the victim of the actor using others’ already opened ant flower beds service is the Alipay account holder,thus excluding the possibility that the actor constitutes loan fraud,credit card fraud and fraud.Based on the current legal provisions,the status quo of judicial decisions and academic opinions,this paper analyzes the legal nature and legal status of all parties involved in the fraudulent use of Alipay account,and draws the conclusion that the behavior of the actor who falsely opens the ant flower garden service of Alipay account owner and uses it should be convicted and sentenced for contract fraud,and the behavior of the actor who uses the ant flower garden service already opened by Alipay account owner should be convicted and sentenced for theft.