监管时代互联网金融犯罪的实务问题

Study on Internet Financial Crimes in Practice and the Border of Penalty in Financial Supervision Era

以P2P网络借贷、网上众筹融资为代表的互联网金融金融发展迅速，但在缺乏监管规则情况下的野蛮生长，触犯了非法吸收公众存款罪、集资诈骗罪等。国家和地方监管层陆续出台了行政监管规章．对部分互联网金融行为划定了禁止线。这些举措能够提高互联网金融业的规范化．加快行业内部调整。但同时．动辄以刑罚介入互联网金融集资的行为与金融创新及普惠金融的发展不相符。我国刑法典和相关司法解释对非法集资犯罪的规定存在不合理之处，处罚范围过大。当前对侵害金融秩序类犯罪如非法吸收公众存款罪等采行为犯和抽象危险犯的立法模式，应当被限缩解释。而对于直接侵害财产法益的集资诈骗犯罪等体现非法占有目的的客观要素也应当严格认定。面对侵害财产权等涉嫌犯罪的互联网金融违规行为，应当发动刑法处罚。互联网金融应当在刑法禁止界限内活动，而非调整刑法以适应互联网。但是在行政监管限度尚不明确的前提下．由于互联网金融天然的公开性和小微企业经营风险的存在，应对缺乏实害的侵犯金融秩序犯罪谨慎处罚。刑法应在保障投资者利益和维护金融创新机制实现中尽量实现平衡。

The interact business developed rapidly in China which P2P network lending and online crowdfunding took representative position. But in the early stage of the development, the business goes without any effective supervision. A large number of Internet financial participants committed the crime of illegal deposits from the public, financial fraud and other financial crimes. National and local regulators have introduced intensive administrative supervision regulations on the Internet financial behavior which mainly delineates inhibit line. These initiatives could improve the standardization of the Internet financial industry, speed up the adjustment within the industry. But at the same time, using penalties in the Internet financial acts inconsistent with financial innovation and the development of inclusive finance. Provisions of the criminal code and relevant judicial interpretations unreasonably define the illegal fund-raising crimes. The current legislative pattern of the financial crimes is Behavioral Offense and Abstract Danger crime, so which should be interpreted narrowly. For direct fund-raising fraud crimes against property and other legal interests, the objective elements which testifies the factor ＂illegal possession purpose＂ should be strictly identified. Facing of the Internet financial irregularities, particularly crime against property direct legal interests, criminal law should involve. But when the administrative supervision of the premise is not clear, due to the openness nature of the Internet and the existence of financial risk of the natural small and micro enterprises, crimes for violations of prudent financial order shall not be punished. The appliance of criminal law should be cautious when dealing with the lack of real harm violations of financial order activities. Criminal law should make a balance to protect the interests of investors and the maintenance of financial innovation mechanisms.