Qualitative Analysis On Using Third-party Payment To Obtain Funds From Others' Accounts

The innovation of Internet mobile payment technology has given the third-party payment platform a broad space for development.The novel payment represented by Alipay has changed the traditional transaction of physical currency and bill,and realized the business regardless of the time and space,which definitely shrinks the crime rate of paper currency,and the crime chances of conventional property.At the same time,the property crime has gradually shifted from traditional physical space to virtual cyberspace.As the alteration also brings challenges and difficulties to the characterization of related property crimes pursuant to the criminal law,whether it is the "different opinions" of the theory community on conduct characterization or the "different judgments on the similar cases" of related cases in the practice circle,this is the "sequela" from the change of crime field and transaction mode.The mobile payment blurs the boundaries of property crimes,and hence it is necessary to classify and characterize property crimes involving third-party payment.The third-party payment platform refers to a trading that has contracted with or authorized by a bank,has certain capability and credibility guarantee,and provides financial services such as transfer,settlement and credit to market entities.It is intermediary,non-bank and financial.According to whether the funds are used for platform operation,the funds are divided into platform account funds and others.The fund versions can be applied to specifically classify the property-against crime,via a third-party payment,into:obtaining the balance of other's account(obtaining the account balance)and obtaining the funds in other's bank card bound to the account(obtaining the bound card fund)"Obtaining the account balance" mainly focuses on theft and fraud,while "obtaining the bound card fund" mainly includes theft and credit card fraud.There are three differences between the two financial infringements.In terms of ownership,the funds involved in "obtaining the account balance" are occupied by third-party payment,while those involved in "obtaining the bound card fund" are done by banks;As for operation,the fund flow engaged in "the account balance" involves users,third-party payment platforms and sellers,while those in "the bound card fund" involves banks and the three parties aforementioned.With regard to infringement of legal interests,the former violates the property ownership and the possession of Alipay accounts,while the other violates not only the property ownership,but also the regulations of financial management order.Qualitative disputes specifically include two points:first,the clarification of the relationship between the third-party payment and the bank;second,whether the third-party payment can become the legal subject of fraud.The payment account belongs to a bank-affiliated account,while the payment platform does not belong to a financial institution.Hence the third-party payment platform cannot be the legal subject of fraud,which denies the possibility of fraud to "the account balance" from the behavior object.The act of "obtaining the account balance" constitutes theft,which conforms to the behavioral characteristics of "breaking possession" and "establishing another possession".The " secrecy" is no longer inevitable for the characterization of the crime to financial invasion in cyberspace.The crime of credit card fraud is constituted by the conduct of"obtaining the bound card fund".At this time,the fraud subject is the bank,while the third-party payment becomes the "instrumental" platform for funds temporarily.Additionally,the third-party account information can be equivalent to credit card in form and substance due to the "financial" element from the bank connection.