Legal Analysis On The Credit Card Fraud Case Committed By A Wang, Et Al.

As a relatively convenient and secure financial settlement tool, credit cards have beenwidely accepted and used by the public in China. The credit cards are based on the personalidentity credit of the registered card holders, and therefore the credit card business hasinherent risks. Although the credit cards are used more and more widely in our country, theregulations on the management and other aspects of the credit cards are not so sound andwhether the management of the financial institutions on the credit cards or the relevantlyaccessory criminal legislation should be further improved. At present, the act of legallyregistering a company as a cover and collecting the handling fee for the card holders witharbitrage and card keeping by cooking up transactions with POS has been found around thecountry, which even tends to develop into an industry. However, the existing criminal lawregulations fail to clearly define the concept of the card holders and the nature of the cardkeeping act, which causes the big difference in the recognition of the said problems in thejudicial practice and major disputes on whether the relevant acts commit crime or not andsuch acts commit this crime or other crime, thus causing the difference in the recognition bythe judicial organs around the country, not conducive to the maintenance of steadydevelopment of financial order of the socialist market and to the protection of legitimaterights and interests of the related entities.This paper takes the credit card fraud case committed by the Wang, et al. as an exampleand makes discussions with five parts on whether the act of the Wang and the Jia is suspectedof offence and what offence is suspected of in this case. Part I introduces the credit card fraudcase committed by the Wang, et al. in detail; Part II lists the four different decision opinion onthe case: the first opinion holds that the Wang and the Jia are the accomplice of the credit cardfraud case, the second opinion holds that the Wang and the Jia are the accomplice of theillegal operation offence, the third opinion holds that the Wang commits the credit card fraudoffence while the Jia commits the illegal operation offence and the fourth opinion holds that the Wang shall only be responsible for the overdraft of two credit cards on his name and thecard keeping act by the Jia belongs to private lending, not committing a crime, only thearbitrage shall be recognized as the illegal operation offence. The controversial disputes of thesaid opinions on the recognition of the act of the Wang and the Jia are as follows: whether theWang and the Jia are the accomplice, the scope of the card holders and whether the paid cardkeeping commits crime; Part III, by analyzing and summarizing the said four opinions,defines that the Wang and the Jia are not joint offence, the card users shall also belong to thecard holders, the card keeping is not the private lending, the paid card keeping is the act ofillegal fund payment settlement business and a criminal offence of illegal operation act in theillegal operation offence; Party IV and Part V, based on the specific fact as well as theprovisions of the criminal law in China on the credit card fraud offence and illegal operationoffence, analyzes and recognizes the act of the Wang and the Jia, and holds that the act of theWang commits the credit card fraud offence, and the act of the Jia commits the illegaloperation offence. The author hopes to make some useful discussions on the offences in thecredit cards on the basis of the credit card fraud offence committed by the Wang, et al.