Study On The Behavior Of "Ant Flower Choke" And Its Qualitative Problems

As a new type of crime of embezzlement,stealing and brushing “Ant Flower Choke” has universality and multiple occurrences in social life.Therefore,it is urgent to convict and punish the act of stealing and brushing ants and flowers.To make a qualitative analysis of the act of stealing and brushing “Ant Flower Choke”,we should first introduce the connotation of “Ant Flower Choke”,and make clear that the legal attribute of “Ant Flower Choke” is a new type of consumer credit product with the color of financial innovation.The act of stealing and brushing “Ant Flower Choke” refers to the act that the perpetrator uses illegal means to occupy the property of others for the purpose of illegally occupying the funds of Ant Flower Choke.Based on the analysis of the current situation of the act of stealing and brushing “Ant Flower Choke”,this paper concludes that the characteristics of the act of stealing and brushing “Ant Flower Choke” are as follows: the unknown nature of the victim,the irreversibility of the harm and the complexity of the intermediate link.In judicial practice,there are three kinds of ways of stealing “ant flower chant” behavior,that is,to pick up or steal someone else's mobile phone,to steal “ant flower chant”,to use other people's Alipay account to carry out “ant flower chant” consumption,and to use other people's Alipay account to carry out three categories of “ant flower chant” cash.Through the judicial cases on the Internet of Chinese judicial documents,it can be seen that the act of stealing and brushing “ant flower choke” mainly revolves around three crimes: theft,fraud and credit card fraud.The controversy of these three charges mainly lies in whether the third-party payment platform can be deceived and whether “Ant Flower Choke” can be regarded as a credit card in the sense of criminal law.Secondly,in the identification of the crime of “Ant Flower Choke”,there are mainly three viewpoints: the crime of fraud,the crime of credit card fraud and the crime of theft.The difference between them lies in the different understanding of the punishment behavior,which leads to the different qualitative analysis of the “ant flower choke” stealing behavior.In the theory of criminal law,there are four theories about whether Alipay has jurisdiction over punishment: subjective theory,camp theory,real time approach theory and authorization theory.There are three theories on whether Alipay can carry out disciplinary actions: the theory of possession transfer,ownership transfer and possession transfer;whether Alipay has sanctions awareness,there are two kinds of doctrines,namely,punishment consciousness,and punishment consciousness.Discussions on various theories from different perspectives are to understand the disposition behavior,which is more conducive to the qualitative analysis of “ant flower choke” behavior.It is more reasonable to define the act of stealing and brushing “Ant Flower Choke” as the crime of stealing.First of all,Alipay does not have the right to dispose of sanctions,and Alipay's implementation of payment is not a disciplinary act and Alipay does not have the sense of punishment in the payment process.From these three aspects,it is denied that the act of stealing ants is not a crime of fraud.Secondly,on the basis of negating the crime of fraud,Alipay company is not a financial institution,“ant flower chant” or a credit card in the criminal law,so it negates the view that the theft of ants is a credit card fraud.Finally,the act of stealing and brushing “Ant Flower Choke” violates the right of possession,violates the will of the victim,and its behavior is secret and accords with the characteristics of theft.Therefore,the act of stealing and brushing “Ant Flower Choke” constitutes the crime of theft.