Qualitative Research On The Behavior Of Using Others' E-commerce Platform Credit To Pay For Products

With the continuous development of the Internet finance industry,people can use more and more Internet financial products,payment methods become more and more diverse,and our lives become more convenient and fast.But at the same time,there are more and more related criminal activities brought about by new things,and we are more and more confused by new things.Who is the ultimate victim caused by fraudulent use of credit payment products of other people's e-commerce platforms?As a new Internet financial payment product,e-commerce platform credit payment products such as “Ant Huabai” and “Jingdong Baitiao”,how to define its legal attributes? If the fraudulent use of credit payment products of other people's ecommerce platforms constitutes a fraud-like crime,does it mean that the machine can be scammed? Does the fraudulent use of the credit payment products of other people's e-commerce platforms meet the theft's behavior characteristics? Does the act of fraudulent use of the credit payment products of others' e-commerce platforms constitute contract fraud,loan fraud,credit card fraud,theft or fraud? Since the relevant provisions of the existing laws in China are not very clear,there is a big difference between the theoretical understanding and the determination of judicial practice regarding the above issues.This article analyzes and sorts out the relevant cases published on the judgment documents online and studies the views of the theoretical community,and finds that the controversial views on the qualitative behavior of using other people's ecommerce platform credit payment products mainly believe that the behavior constitutes contract fraud and loan fraud Crime,credit card fraud crime,theft crime and fraud crime.The point of view that the act constitutes a crime of contract fraud or loan fraud is mainly derived from judicial practice,but through the identification of the true victim under the act and the analysis of the nature of the organization behind the e-commerce platform,it can be clear that the act does not constitute a contract Crime of fraud or loan fraud.The point of view that the act constitutes a crime of credit card fraud,or a crime of theft,or constitutes a crime of fraud mainly comes from the theoretical world.The focus of the dispute among the three parties is mainly on the e-commerce platform credit payment products such as "Anthuabai" and "Jingdong Baitiao" Whether it is a credit card in the sense of criminal law,and whether the e-commerce platform that provides credit payment products as a machine can be deceived.Regarding these two issues,scholars have different views.Based on the views of scholars,this article deeply analyzes the nature of the credit payment products of the e-commerce platform and the nature of the operating company behind it,and theoretically re-understands whether the machine can be deceived,and finally draws the electricity The credit payment product of the merchant platform is not a credit card in the sense of criminal law.The conclusion that the e-commerce platform that provides credit payment products can be deceived as a machine based on intelligence.Based on the above conclusions,fraudulent use of credit payment products of other people's e-commerce platforms can constitute fraud,but not credit card fraud.As for whether this act can constitute a crime of theft,this article starts with the characteristics of theft and the characteristics of fraudulent use of credit payment products of other people's e-commerce platforms.Use behavior,rather than the active acquisition and secret stealing behavior of general theft,so this behavior cannot constitute a theft crime.From this,it is concluded that the act of fraudulently using another person's e-commerce platform credit payment product constitutes a crime of fraud.