A Study On The Boundary Between Theft Crime And Fraud Crime Under The New Payment Mode

The crime of theft and fraud usually has a clear distinction,but the emergence of new payment methods has once again brought the distinction between theft and fraud into chaos.In practice,there is controversy over the identification of theft and fraud.Taking the case of "stealing WeChat QR code" as an example,there are mainly two viewpoints.One viewpoint is that the actor constitutes theft,and the other view is that the actor constitutes a crime of fraud.The crime of fraud is that the perpetrators steal the QR code to make customers and businesses misunderstand.The customer will transfer the bank's claims to the perpetrator based on the misunderstanding.The perpetrator does not violate the customer's will,and the customer voluntarily disposes of the property.Therefore,the actor constitutes a crime of fraud.The argument that the perpetrator constitutes theft crime believes that the key to the fraud of the perpetrator is to illegally possess the property of others by secret stealing.There is no meaningful communication between the perpetrator and the victim,and there is no intermediate behavior of the victim disposing of the property.Both of these views have their own focus and controversy.This paper starts from the objective components of the crime of theft and the crime of fraud,and discusses the qualitative issues of the related property crimes under the new payment method.The first part introduces the challenges brought by the new payment methods to the qualitative nature of the case,and sorts out the theoretical disputes about the case,and summarizes the focus issues.The second part mainly enumerates and analyzes the factual problems and legal issues encountered in the characterization of specific cases.The third part makes a distinction between theft and fraud under the new payment method,focusing on the victim's disciplinary awareness and disciplinary behavior.Does the victim have any discretion? What is the relationship between disciplinary awareness and disciplinary behavior? By answering the above questions,we can determine the nature of the related property infringement crimes under the new payment method.This paper believes that the behavior of the perpetrator to "steal the QR code" is to let the customer pay the money,the agent and the merchant do not have the meaning exchange,and the perpetrator does not want the merchant to discover the stolen behavior,the merchant No voluntary disciplinary action was taken,and the merchant did not instruct the customer to transfer the creditor's rights to him.Therefore,the perpetrator did not commit fraud.There is a contract of sale and purchase between the customer and the merchant.The merchant enjoys and possesses the creditor's right to the customer,and the perpetrator has invaded the property interests of the merchant and constitutes theft.In the final analysis,it is necessary to distinguish between the crime of theft under the new payment method and the crime of fraud,or to distinguish the nature of different types of criminal behavior.