A Research On Legal Determination Of Stealing Virtual Property

In an age of digital information,the network technology develops rapidly,new things emerge in endlessly.From the beginning of the QQ accounts,game accounts,game equipments,etc.,to the taobao shops,wechat business accounts,etc.,all kinds of virtual properties played important roles increasingly in People’s Daily life.The disputes consist of civil disputes and criminal disputes caused by virtual properties are increasing,such as QQ coins and game equipment stolen,taobao stores inheritance and segmentation.However,because of the inherent defects of law---hysteresis,the legal protection for all sorts of virtual properties is absence to some extent.Although the General Civil Law makes clear that "If there are relevant provisions on Legal protection for data,network virtual property,such provisions shall be abided by",that provides Civil Law support for the virtual property protection,The legal basis for protecting virtual property is still obscure.No matter in judicial theoretical cycle or in judicial practice circle,the recognitions on the behavior of stealing virtual property are so different.It mainly shows two positions:fist is affirmed virtual property as substantial property,so that the behaviors of stealing virtual property constitute larceny;second is denied virtual property as substantial property,virtual propertys are not belong property category,they are just computer information data or codes,so that the behaviors of stealing virtual property constitute computer crime or communication freedom encroachment crime.Because of the different theoretical recognition and confused judicial decision on the behaviors of stealing virtual property,the law qualitative of virtual property theft is still vague,that weaken the legal credibility in some degree.The first two parts of this article discussed the disputes of the law qualitative of stealing virtual property on theoretical recognition level and judicial decision level,analyzed and compared the theoretical and practical basis punished by larceny,computer crime or communication freedom encroachment crime,what’s more the problem and influence of the "same law case,different judgment" phenomenon.The third part of the article explored the crux of the law qualitative of virtual property theft,made clear the substance of virtual property by discriminating its concept and attribute.Then cleard up doubts about the crux of the law qualitative of virtual property theft,provided theoretical foundation for discussing the necessity of criminal law regulation on stealing virtual property from two levels include the depth development of the Internet and gradual promotion of legal protection.The fourth part of this article is about the criminal law regulation of stealing virtual property,that analyzed the problems punished by computer crime or communication freedom encroachment crime,such as sentencing inequality,punishment loophole and violating legal interest protection,and then emphasized the reasons that punishing the behaviors of stealing virtual property by larceny,such as conforming to the constitutive elements of larceny,according with the principle of legality,keeping with the principle of suiting Responsibility and Punishment to Crime,and identifing with the purpose of protecting legal interest.Certainly,punishing the the behaviors of stealing virtual property by larceny still exist some problems,such as burglary amount recognition and criminal pattern issues.But these problems are not bottle-neck that restricting criminal law regulation of stealing virtual property by larceny,and could be solved by setting up some explicit criteria.The article intended to study on the law qualitative of stealing virtual property,and then make the protection of virtual property cause of enough attention.By analyzing the different between theoretical knowledge of theory and judicial practice and judicial decisions,prompte legislation can subject to unified regulation of related issues,make"the same and similar cases will be the same and similar the verdict",reduce the theoretical divergence and eliminate judicial qualitative differences,fill the blank of the law,standardize judicial order in the field of virtual property.