Qualitative Research On Obtaining Wrong Remittance Behavior

In the sense of the result,a bank transfer refers to the money formed by the remitter entrusting the bank to remit a certain amount of money to the recipient’s account.If an error factor is involved in the remittance process,resulting in an error in the amount and object of the remittance,the wrong remittance occurs.It is controversial in theory and practice how the withdrawal should be characterized by the fact that the withdrawal party is aware of the fact that the money is wrongly remitted but still uses the bank’s normal business behavior to receive the money,and improperly converts the deposit claim of the erroneous remittance into cash.The mainstream analysis path starts from the theory of deposit possession,takes the possession content and possession method of the wrong remittance by the remitter and the recipient as the core issue,and demonstrates whether the payee has legitimate withdrawal authority and the subject and object harmed by the collection behavior,and concludes that there are three conclusions:innocence,fraud or theft,and embezzlement.The theory of innocence and misappropriation holds that the deposit claim is in the possession of the depositor,and the recipient of the erroneous remittance has the proper right to withdraw money in form,but in essence,because the erroneous remittance lacks the true intention of the remitter and is unjust enrichment in nature,it is not entitled to withdraw money.Fraud or theft is said to believe that the deposit cash is in the possession of the bank,and the recipient does not have proper withdrawal authority for the wrong remittance,so the withdrawal completed by using the teller’s misperception at the bank counter constitutes the crime of fraud,and the withdrawal behavior facilitated by the system on the ATM or other machine constitutes the crime of theft.In the case of erroneous remittance,in order to ensure that the remitter can recover the money and does not bear the risk that the payee will not be able to pay its creditors due to its own negligence,it must be recognized that the claim established between the parties as a result of the erroneous remittance is of a property nature and can be paid in priority over other ordinary claims.To this end,some views are based on the development process of criminal law theory,and discuss that possession of criminal law has normative characteristics,and depositors enjoy possession of abstract deposit claims.Some views cite civil law theory to analyze that the nature of deposit claims is quasi-property right,and the depositor’s possession of deposit claim is quasi-possession.Taken together,a deposit claim for erroneous remittance can be interpreted as a claim for return of value in rem.The remitter’s right to erroneously remitted money has the effect of pursuing property rights,but it is limited to the abstract nature of deposit claims,and can only request the recipient to return property of equal value,rather than specific deposit claims.According to this analysis,the flaw of the innocence theory lies in only evaluating the result of the payee obtaining unjust enrichment,ignoring the subsequent withdrawal of money and other illegal appropriation of other people’s property,and the actual enforcement of the judgment of the civil law unjust enrichment lawsuit is difficult,which invisibly increases the cost of protecting the rights of the remitter.The defect of the theory of fraud or theft is that it is contrary to the theory of "deposit claims and deposit cash",and it is difficult to adapt to the current practice of economic life.The misappropriation theory interprets the erroneous remittance as "other people’s property that is kept on behalf of others",pointing out that the recipient has established management and control over the erroneous remittance because it has obtained unjust enrichment,and should protect the erroneous remittance from its own harm because it is obliged to return the unjust enrichment,and if the act of withdrawing money will constitute the purpose of illegal possession,refusing to return the property of others for safekeeping.The embezzlement theory can evaluate the act of receiving erroneous remittances in a complete,comprehensive and up-to-date manner,and provide strong relief for remitters with the coercive force of criminal law.