The Behavior Characterization Of Illegal Embezzlement Of Alipay Funds

Nowadays,electronic devices are given more functions,and communication devices such as mobile phones can be used for payment,transfer,and the like.Third-party payment is increasingly becoming the main means of daily trading,but at the same time,there are more and more criminal acts committed by means of equipment and third-party payment platforms.The illegal possession of funds in bonded accounts will also be obtained in different courts.Different referee results.Therefore,it is necessary to analyze and sort out the illegal possession of account funds,unify the criteria,and balance the crimes and punishments.The first part is to introduce the basic situation of the case.On the basis of the introduction of Zhong's snatch case,the divergent opinions are expounded in this part: one opinion holds that the transfer behavior should be combined with the amount of the mobile phone's price,which constitutes the crime of snatching;another opinion is believed that the behavior of Zhong's robbing the mobile phone and the illegal possession of the bound account funds should constitute two crimes,but the amount of robbing did not meet the conviction standard,only enough to commit larceny;the last opinion is that Zhong's behavior of mobile phones has not reached the standard of conviction.Although the transfer and consumption behaviors have violated the crime of fraud,they have not reached the standard of conviction,so the perpetrator does not constitute a crime.After clarifying the disagreement in this case,the focus of the dispute in this case is summarized: whether there is a correlation between the seizure of mobile phones and the misuses of Alipay,and determine the nature of misuses of Alipay after illegal possession of mobile phones.The second part is the legal analysis of related issues.In view of the above-mentioned controversy,on the one hand,jurisprudential analysis of behavioral relevance issues from the perspectives of judicial interpretation,completion form,generalized intention and intentionality;on the other hand,starting with the disposition of the subject,defining the disciplinary process in the process of transferring funds from third-party payment platforms Subject,deceived subject and its nature.Then,the legal analysis is carried out from the theory that the machine is deceived,disposition consciousness and disposition authority.Finally,from the Alipay property analysis,define the similarities and differences between credit card information and Alipay information.The third part is the analysis and conclusion of this case.On the basis of jurisprudentialanalysis,the behavior of the illegal possession of the bound account in this case is qualitative.On the one hand,the act of robbing the mobile phone has been accomplished,and the misuse of Alipay has no causal link with the act of robbing the mobile phone,which is another criminal intention.However,because the amount of mobile phones seized does not meet the standard of conviction,it does not constitute a crime;On the other hand,in the third-party platform,the disposition of the main body of the property is Alipay and the bank,the possessor of the property is the bank,and the "deceiver" is Alipay.Since the machine cannot be deceived,it has no disciplinary awareness and disposition authority,nor can it“voluntarily” decide whether to dispose of the property,and Alipay information cannot be identified as “credit card information” as stipulated by the Criminal Law.Therefore,the defendant's use of consumption is contrary to the will of others,and the amount is large,which should constitute theft.The fourth part is the enlightenment of this case.On the one hand,the social harm of robbing behavior is relatively large,but it is difficult to convicted,which will result in incompatible crimes.Therefore,it is necessary to reduce the conviction standard of snatch.On the other hand,the use of third-party payment platforms will become more and more common and will become the main means of people's transactions.Although the state's promulgation policy is constantly protecting the legitimate rights and interests of users,the crime of illegal possession of funds in bound accounts will still exist,and similar cases are not recognized in practice,which is not conducive to the balance of crimes.Therefore,it is necessary for the Supreme People's Court and Supreme People's Procuratorate to introduce judicial interpretation to unify the application of such cases.When the criminal law cannot flexibly make corresponding provisions on the current situation,the pre-law of the criminal law should be regulated timely.