Research On The Criminal Law Regulation Of ICO Financing Behavio

In recent years,the popularity of ICO has far exceeded the market imagination.Because of its unique financing advantages,this financial innovation model enables start-ups to get rid of the difficulties of financing in the past,and can quickly obtain the funds needed for their development.However,at present,under the premise that the supervision of ICO financing in China is not in place,speculators take advantage of the unique anonymity of ICO technology and the inability to set up institutional supervision,issue digital currency by themselves,carry out false ICO projects,exaggerate false propaganda,attract investors who don’t know the ICO operation mechanism but pursue high returns to invest,and then run away after the funds enter the account,leaving only investors who have lost their money.This new financing model has brought great impact to the management order of financial market.At present,China’s supervision of ICO is totally prohibited,but ICO has not completely disappeared,instead,it has turned overseas and continued to develop in a more subtle way.At present,China’s laws and regulations don’t clearly stipulate the financing object of ICO-digital currency,and the conviction and sentencing of ICO financing behavior,which also leads to a heated debate in academic circles about whether ICO financing behavior constitutes a crime and what kind of crime it constitutes.Therefore,this paper analyzes the risks caused by illegal financing of ICO,and on the basis of affirming the strict supervision of the state,combs the definitions of digital currency given by domestic and foreign scholars,and clarifies the connotation and legal attributes of digital currency,so as to provide a reasonable legal basis for regulating illegal financing of ICO.At the same time,through the magic weapon of Peking University,the author sorts out the crimes involved in the illegal financing of ICO from 2016 to 2022,finds out the judicial status quo of illegal financing of ICO,makes a concrete analysis of the controversial elements of charges,explores the dilemma of confession in practice,summarizes the controversial focus in conviction,and on this basis,tries to put forward the path of regulating illegal financing of ICO in order to realize the combination of theory and practice.This paper consists of introduction,text and conclusion.The introduction consists of four parts:research background,research content,research methods and innovations.The conclusion part summarizes and sublimates the article.The first part of the text summarizes ICO financing behavior.Firstly,through the analysis of ICO operation foundation and operation mode,the concepts of ICO,equity crowdfunding and IPO are distinguished,and ICO is classified,so as to define the concept of ICO financing behavior.Secondly,the analysis of ICO financing behavior has the characteristics of special financing object,low issue threshold,low financing cost,high efficiency,anonymity and decentralization,and lack of legal regulation.Then,the possible market,credit,financial technology security and legal risks caused by these characteristics are analyzed,so as to sum up the causes of the risks and the harmful consequences,lay the foundation for the following research and provide theoretical support.The second part mainly analyzes the legal regulation status and existing problems of ICO illegal financing behavior at home and abroad.This paper lists the relevant laws and regulations on ICO financing in the mainland,Taiwan Province,South Korea,Germany,the United States,Russia,Japan and the United Kingdom through Tables 1-1 and 2-1,and it can be clearly concluded that the mainland and South Korea have a completely prohibited attitude towards ICO activities.Germany,the United States,Russia,Japan and China’s Taiwan Province have brought it into the current supervision;Britain adopts the financial sandbox system for regulation.At the same time,according to different countries’(regions’) convictions of ICO illegal financing in judicial practice,it is concluded that the fundamental reason for the differences in the conviction of ICO illegal financing lies in different countries’(regions’) different understandings of digital currency’s legal attributes and the characterization of ICO financing.However,in China’s current judicial practice,because of the focus of the above debate,the conviction of ICO financing behavior is controversial.The third part evaluates the legal attributes of ICO recruitment objects.At present,there are different theories about the attributes of digital currency in academic circles,such as money theory,intellectual property theory,commodity theory,data theory,property right theory,creditor’s right theory and property right theory.On the basis of studying the causes of each theory,the author demonstrates the irrationality of money theory,intellectual property theory,data theory and creditor’s right theory,and affirms that digital currency has property right attribute and property right attribute.The fourth part is the response to the criminal risks caused by ICO’s illegal financing.Firstly,define the crime and non-crime in ICO financing,and provide legal norms and protection for the innovation and development of start-up small and medium-sized enterprises by clarifying the demarcation basis between illegal public financing and financial technology innovation.Secondly,define this crime and other crimes in ICO financing,and identify the "four characteristics" of illegal fund-raising crimes involved in ICO financing;The identification of the crime of illegal business operation involved in ICO financing "violating state regulations and seriously disturbing social order" and the identification of "defrauding property" and "profit model" in the crime of organizing and leading pyramid schemes,finally,the criminal law regulation path of ICO financing behavior is obtained.