1.问题的提出
1. Questions raised
以区块链技术为基础的加密数字货币作为一种数字资产，是数字经济时代下的新型资产形态。加密数字货币因具有去中心化、高度匿名性等特点，已逐渐受到各国投资者的狂热追捧，随之而来的是盗取、骗取等方式非法转移加密数字货币的刑事案件不断涌现。对该类行为的法律适用在实务界和理论界存在较大分歧，主要表现为加密数字货币法律属性不明，价值难以计算等问题。
Encrypted digital money, based on block-chain technology, is a new form of asset in the digital economy. Encrypted digital money, owing to its decentralized and highly anonymous character, has been gaining traction among investors in various countries.
2.非法转移加密数字货币犯罪案件的判决情况
2. Status of judgements in cases of illegal transfer of encrypted digital currency crimes
文章该部分将收集的相关案例进行研判分析，发现该类案件的判决情况主要呈现以下特点：一是有关加密数字货币的盗窃案件以窃电力“挖矿”为主，以盗窃罪定性的窃取加密数字货币案件总体较少。二是常见以加密数字货币交易为幌子实施诈骗，骗取加密数字货币的行为类型较少。三是非法转移加密数字货币以侵财犯罪定性的判例总体较少，但逐年呈类型多样化，且数量有增加的趋势。四是实务中对加密数字货币能否以侵财犯罪定性，争议的焦点在于加密数字货币法律属性不明及犯罪数额认定标准不一。
The section of the article will analyse the relevant cases collected and finds that the sentencing situation in this category is characterized mainly by the following: first, the theft of encrypted digital currency is dominated by electrical theft “mining”, and there are fewer cases of theft of encrypted digital currency in general, characterized by theft. Second, fraud is often carried out under the guise of encrypted digital currency transactions, with fewer types of fraud. Third, the illegal transfer of encrypted digital currency to characterize financial crimes is characterized by fewer cases overall, but is diversified from year to year, and there is a tendency to increase in numbers. fourth, whether encrypted digital currency can be characterized as a crime of embezzlement in practice, with the controversy centred on unclear legal characteristics of encrypted digital currency and different criteria for determining the amount of crime.
3.非法转移加密数字货币犯罪案件的理论分歧
3. Theoretical differences in cases of illegal transfer of encrypted digital currency crimes
文章该部分在案例调研的基础上，梳理了当前刑法学界对加密数字货币定位问题的理论争议，主要存在以下几方面的认识分歧：一是加密数字货币能否认定为货币；二是加密数字货币是否具备财产的基本属性，具体为是否具有稀缺性，是否凝结了人类抽象的劳动力，是否具有使用、交换价值；三是加密数字货币是否具有可控性。
On the basis of case studies, this part of the article sums up the current theoretical controversy in criminal law on the positioning of cryptographic digital money, with major differences in understanding as to whether encrypted digital currencies can be identified as currencies; whether encrypted digital currencies possess the basic attributes of property, specifically their scarcity, whether they condensate the abstract labour force of humankind, and whether they have use and value for exchange; and whether encrypted digital currencies are controlled.
4.非法转移加密数字货币的司法认定路径
4. Judicially identified routes for the illegal transfer of encrypted digital currencies
该部分是文章的重点内容，主要结合司法实践及相关理论，提出加密数字货币的法律属性及犯罪数额认定规则的司法认定路径。
The section, which is the focus of the article, sets out, mainly in the context of judicial practice and related doctrine, the legal attributes of encrypted digital currency and the path to judicial determination of the rules for determining the amount of the crime.
(1)加密数字货币应认定为刑法意义上的财物
(1) Encrypted digital currency shall be deemed to be property within the meaning of criminal law
第一，从政策角度、经济学角度以及保障金融安全方面应当否定加密数字货币的货币地位，但由此不能直接推导出加密数字货币仅仅是一段没有价值的电子数据。
First, the monetary status of encrypted digital currencies should be denied from a policy point of view, from an economic point of view and from the point of view of safeguarding financial security, but it cannot be directly deduced that encrypted digital currencies are merely a valuable electronic data.
第二，从加密数字货币依赖大量耗费资源的挖矿产生，基于技术的有限性，以及客观上普遍认可的使用价值和交易价值，应认定其属于特殊的虚拟财产。
Second, it should be considered as a special virtual property, based on the limited nature of technology and the objectively generally accepted value of use and transactional value of encrypted digital currencies, which depend on resource-intensive mining.
第三，把虚拟财产纳入财产犯罪对象符合当前司法判例，也符合国际立法趋势。
Third, the inclusion of virtual property as an object of property crime is consistent with current jurisprudence and with international legislative trends.
第四，结合罪责刑相适应的原则，应当将非法转移加密数字货币以侵财犯罪论处。此外，以非法获取计算机信息系统数据罪定性，无法解决诈骗、敲诈勒索加密数字货币等犯罪行为的定性处理。
Fourthly, in conjunction with the principle of criminal liability, the illegal transfer of encrypted digital currency should be criminalized for financial offences. Moreover, the characterization of the offence of illegal access to computer information systems data does not solve the characterization of offences such as fraud, extortion and extortion of encrypted digital currency.
(2)非法转移加密数字货币犯罪数额的认定思路
(2) The idea of determining the amount of the crime of illegal transfer of encrypted digital currency
我们认为，“挖矿”方式相差悬殊，生产成本缺乏计算方法，而“平台平均价”变量因素过多，难以确定公允价格。拟提出适用三级递进适用的认定标准：
We believe that the “mining” approach varies widely, that production costs are not calculated, and that the “platform average” variable factors are too numerous to determine fair prices.
第一，参考受贿司法意见对股票价格的认定，有交易价格的，以转移加密数字货币时的平台交易价认定。既符合司法解释精神，又能体现出行为人犯罪行为的罪责。
First, the value of shares is determined by reference to the judicial opinion on passive bribery, and if there is a transaction price, the price is determined by the platform in which the encrypted digital currency is transferred.
第二，缺乏平台交易价的，优先以销赃价认定。销赃价一定程度上能体现加密数字货币的价值，将损失数额可以作为量刑情节考虑，同样能够罚当其罪。
Second, where there is a lack of platform trading price, priority is given to the sale price. The sale price reflects, to a certain extent, the value of the encrypted digital currency, the amount of the loss being taken into account as a mitigating circumstance, and it is equally punishable.
第三，没有平台交易价又未销赃的，以被害人购入价计算。侵财犯罪的设置旨在保护他人的财产权益，以被害人的购入价认定加密数字货币的价值，体现了被害人所遭受的实际财产损失，还能反映犯罪行为社会危害性的大小。
Third, if there is no platform transaction price and it has not been sold, it is calculated at the victim’s purchase price.
作者：瑞安市人民检察院 林胜超 林海珍
Author: The Ryan City People's Procuratorate, Lin Seung-hyun, Lin Hae-jin.
发表：《中国检察官》2021年第18期 查看内容
注册有任何问题请添加 微信：MVIP619 拉你进入群
打开微信扫一扫
添加客服
进入交流群
发表评论