随着时代发展和科技进步,新型支付方式的不断涌现,侵财手段不断翻新。以往在传统支付方式下,盗窃罪与诈骗罪的区分都存在着不小的难度,新型支付方式的出现更是让两罪的区分变得更加的模糊复杂。但正是因为两者的区分难度大,才更加需要...随着时代发展和科技进步,新型支付方式的不断涌现,侵财手段不断翻新。以往在传统支付方式下,盗窃罪与诈骗罪的区分都存在着不小的难度,新型支付方式的出现更是让两罪的区分变得更加的模糊复杂。但正是因为两者的区分难度大,才更加需要对两罪进行准确合理的区分。文章从三个颇受争议的案件作为切入口——臧进泉案、偷换二维码案和擅自登陆他人支付宝给他人转账案。通过对这三个案件的定性分歧和焦点争议,进行深入的分析,并说明两罪之间区分的关键因素。从盗窃罪与诈骗罪的处分行为入手,对处分意识的必要性进行分析。对于支付宝等具有支付功能的第三方软件在司法实践中能否被骗,和第三方介入时对被害人的确认都有了明确的说明。在新型支付方式下,区分盗窃罪与诈骗罪,对于司法实践中精准打击犯罪和定罪量刑,保护被害人的合法权益具有十分重要的意义。With the development of the times and the advancement of science and technology, new payment methods continue to emerge, and the means of invading money are constantly being renovated. In the past, it was difficult to distinguish the crime of theft and the crime of fraud under the traditional payment method. The emergence of new payment methods has made the distinction between the two crimes more blurred and complicated. But because the distinction between the two is difficult, it is even more necessary to make an accurate and reasonable distinction between the two crimes. This article will start with three controversial cases—the Zang Jinquan case, the case of stealing a QR code, and the case of unauthorized access to Alipay to transfer money to others. Through the qualitative differences and focal disputes in these three cases, an in-depth analysis is carried out, and the key factors that distinguish the two crimes are illustrated. Starting from the disciplinary actions of theft and fraud, the necessity of disciplinary awareness is analyzed. Whether third-party software with payment functions such as Alipay can be deceived in judicial practice and the victim’s grasp when the third party intervenes has been clearly explained. Distinguishing the crime of theft and the crime of fraud under the new payment method has profound significance for conviction and sentencing in judicial practice, precise crackdown on crimes and protection of the legal interests of victims.展开更多
文摘随着时代发展和科技进步,新型支付方式的不断涌现,侵财手段不断翻新。以往在传统支付方式下,盗窃罪与诈骗罪的区分都存在着不小的难度,新型支付方式的出现更是让两罪的区分变得更加的模糊复杂。但正是因为两者的区分难度大,才更加需要对两罪进行准确合理的区分。文章从三个颇受争议的案件作为切入口——臧进泉案、偷换二维码案和擅自登陆他人支付宝给他人转账案。通过对这三个案件的定性分歧和焦点争议,进行深入的分析,并说明两罪之间区分的关键因素。从盗窃罪与诈骗罪的处分行为入手,对处分意识的必要性进行分析。对于支付宝等具有支付功能的第三方软件在司法实践中能否被骗,和第三方介入时对被害人的确认都有了明确的说明。在新型支付方式下,区分盗窃罪与诈骗罪,对于司法实践中精准打击犯罪和定罪量刑,保护被害人的合法权益具有十分重要的意义。With the development of the times and the advancement of science and technology, new payment methods continue to emerge, and the means of invading money are constantly being renovated. In the past, it was difficult to distinguish the crime of theft and the crime of fraud under the traditional payment method. The emergence of new payment methods has made the distinction between the two crimes more blurred and complicated. But because the distinction between the two is difficult, it is even more necessary to make an accurate and reasonable distinction between the two crimes. This article will start with three controversial cases—the Zang Jinquan case, the case of stealing a QR code, and the case of unauthorized access to Alipay to transfer money to others. Through the qualitative differences and focal disputes in these three cases, an in-depth analysis is carried out, and the key factors that distinguish the two crimes are illustrated. Starting from the disciplinary actions of theft and fraud, the necessity of disciplinary awareness is analyzed. Whether third-party software with payment functions such as Alipay can be deceived in judicial practice and the victim’s grasp when the third party intervenes has been clearly explained. Distinguishing the crime of theft and the crime of fraud under the new payment method has profound significance for conviction and sentencing in judicial practice, precise crackdown on crimes and protection of the legal interests of victims.
