第三方支付环境下侵财犯罪定性研究  

Qualitative Study on Property Crime under Third-Party Payment

作　　者：杨玉晓[1,2] YANG Yuxiao(Southwest University of Political Science and Law,Chongqing 401120,China;Zhoukou Municipal People's Procuratorate,Zhoukou Henan 466000,China)

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学,重庆401120 [2]周口市人民检察院,河南周口466000

出　　处：《河南警察学院学报》2020年第3期70-75,共6页Journal of Henan Police College

基　　金：国家重点研发计划项目“多元涉诉信访智能处置技术研究”(2018YFC0831800);西南政法大学2020年度博士生科研创新项目“区块链金融刑法问题研究”(FXY2020012)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：第三方支付方式的普及,为该环境下侵财犯罪的发生提供了土壤。第三方支付平台账户内储存的是“数字化财物”,此类侵财犯罪与传统侵财犯罪并无本质上的差别,但在定性上,仍存在盗窃罪、诈骗罪和信用卡诈骗罪之争。由于第三方支付环境下侵财犯罪不具有秘密窃取的特征,故不构成盗窃罪。因该类行为属于主动获取型犯罪,与非法取得他人的信用卡并在自动柜员机上使用实质相同,因而应认定为信用卡诈骗罪。With the popularization of the third-party payment,property crime emerges under this context.The accounts of the third-party payment platform store“digital property”.In this context,there is no essential difference between the property crime and the traditional one;but it has qualitative disputes on whether it belongs to theft,fraud or credit card fraud.As it does not have the features of secret theft,this property crime cannot be constituted as theft but an active delivery type,which is essentially the same as illegally obtaining others'credit cards and using them on ATMS.As for ATMS is an intelligent machine that can be cheated,so property crime under the third-party payment should be constituted as the credit card fraud.

关 键 词：第三方支付 数字化财物 侵财犯罪 信用卡诈骗罪 

分 类 号：D616[政治法律—政治学]