在数字经济时代,电子商务已经成为我国一个关键的新经济增长领域。信用是电子商务高质量发展的重要支柱。刷单炒信行为严重扰乱市场竞争秩序,已成为新型网络犯罪治理的突出问题。所谓刷单炒信,是指在电子商务平台上,通过多次虚构交易或...在数字经济时代,电子商务已经成为我国一个关键的新经济增长领域。信用是电子商务高质量发展的重要支柱。刷单炒信行为严重扰乱市场竞争秩序,已成为新型网络犯罪治理的突出问题。所谓刷单炒信,是指在电子商务平台上,通过多次虚构交易或编造评价等方式,影响网络商家信用水平的行为。当前在理论和实践中,刷单炒信行为的刑法规制路径并不统一。在现阶段若采取新增设罪名的做法,缺少充分的正当性与合理性,可能存在一定问题。相反选择适用现有罪名,是一条更具合理性的规制路径。具体而言,刷单炒信行为不能适用破坏生产经营罪,应该优先依据行为类型进行具体评价。反向型刷单炒信行为有可能构成虚假广告的罪行,而正向型刷单炒信行为则可能构成损害商业信誉、商品声誉罪。只有在特殊罪名不适用的情况下,才能依法认定刷单炒信行为构成非法经营罪。In the era of digital economy, e-commerce has become a key new economic growth area in our country. Credit is an important pillar for the high-quality development of e-commerce. In order to seriously disrupt the market competition order, it has become a prominent problem in the governance of new cybercrimes. The so-called “brush single speculation” refers to the behavior of influencing the credit level of online merchants through multiple fictitious transactions or fabricated evaluations on e-commerce platforms. At present, in theory and practice, the path of criminal law regulation is not uniform. At this stage, if we adopt the method of adding new charges, it lacks sufficient legitimacy and rationality, and there may be some problems. On the contrary, choosing to apply the existing charges is a more reasonable regulatory path. To be specific, the brush-single speculation is not applicable to the crime of destroying production and operation, and should give priority to specific evaluation according to the type of behavior. The reverse type of trading trading may constitute a crime of false advertising, while the positive type of trading trading may constitute a crime of damaging commercial reputation and commodity reputation. Only in the case of special charges do not apply, can be found in accordance with the law as a crime of illegal business.展开更多
在互联网大背景下,网购已经成为民众不可或缺的一种生活方式。电商发展势头也逐渐向好,电商在逐利的同时,矛盾也显现出来。一些商家为了打击竞争对手,间接提升自己的利益,采用反向刷单手段来攻击竞争商家的信用评价。一是因为反向刷单...在互联网大背景下,网购已经成为民众不可或缺的一种生活方式。电商发展势头也逐渐向好,电商在逐利的同时,矛盾也显现出来。一些商家为了打击竞争对手,间接提升自己的利益,采用反向刷单手段来攻击竞争商家的信用评价。一是因为反向刷单隐蔽性和极大社会危害性的特点,二来是电商平台监管不严、主体诚信缺失,还有法律规定模糊,民法、行政法和行业制度对反向刷单的打击并未取得成效,适用刑事手段规制反向刷单行为刻不容缓。学界对反向刷单适用破坏生产经营罪和损害商业信誉、商业声誉罪的争议最大,从实质解释和立法目的出发,再结合时代背景,反向刷单行为适用上述罪名有很大可能。最后从实际出发,结合学者建议,增设新罪名直接保护信用评价机制,或者出台司法解释,同时要加强罚金作用,有效抑制反向刷单现象。Under the background of the Internet, online shopping has become an indispensable way of life for people. The development momentum of e-commerce has gradually improved, and while e-commerce is pursuing profits, contradictions have also emerged. In order to attack competitors, some merchants indirectly enhance their own interests, using reverse brush single means to attack the credit evaluation of competitive merchants. One is because of the hidden nature of reverse brushing and the characteristics of great social harm, the second is the lack of strict supervision of e-commerce platforms, the lack of integrity of the main body, and vague legal provisions, civil law, administrative law and industry system to combat reverse brushing has not achieved results, the application of criminal means to regulate reverse brushing behavior is urgent. The academic circles have the most controversy on the application of reverse brushing to the crime of destroying production and operation and the crime of damaging commercial reputation and commercial reputation. From the substantive interpretation and legislative purpose, combined with the background of The Times, it is very possible to apply the reverse brushing behavior to the above crimes. Finally, from the actual point of view, combined with the suggestions of scholars, the addition of new charges to directly protect the credit evaluation mechanism, or the introduction of judicial interpretation, while strengthening the role of fines, effectively inhibit the phenomenon of reverse brushing.展开更多
文摘在数字经济时代,电子商务已经成为我国一个关键的新经济增长领域。信用是电子商务高质量发展的重要支柱。刷单炒信行为严重扰乱市场竞争秩序,已成为新型网络犯罪治理的突出问题。所谓刷单炒信,是指在电子商务平台上,通过多次虚构交易或编造评价等方式,影响网络商家信用水平的行为。当前在理论和实践中,刷单炒信行为的刑法规制路径并不统一。在现阶段若采取新增设罪名的做法,缺少充分的正当性与合理性,可能存在一定问题。相反选择适用现有罪名,是一条更具合理性的规制路径。具体而言,刷单炒信行为不能适用破坏生产经营罪,应该优先依据行为类型进行具体评价。反向型刷单炒信行为有可能构成虚假广告的罪行,而正向型刷单炒信行为则可能构成损害商业信誉、商品声誉罪。只有在特殊罪名不适用的情况下,才能依法认定刷单炒信行为构成非法经营罪。In the era of digital economy, e-commerce has become a key new economic growth area in our country. Credit is an important pillar for the high-quality development of e-commerce. In order to seriously disrupt the market competition order, it has become a prominent problem in the governance of new cybercrimes. The so-called “brush single speculation” refers to the behavior of influencing the credit level of online merchants through multiple fictitious transactions or fabricated evaluations on e-commerce platforms. At present, in theory and practice, the path of criminal law regulation is not uniform. At this stage, if we adopt the method of adding new charges, it lacks sufficient legitimacy and rationality, and there may be some problems. On the contrary, choosing to apply the existing charges is a more reasonable regulatory path. To be specific, the brush-single speculation is not applicable to the crime of destroying production and operation, and should give priority to specific evaluation according to the type of behavior. The reverse type of trading trading may constitute a crime of false advertising, while the positive type of trading trading may constitute a crime of damaging commercial reputation and commodity reputation. Only in the case of special charges do not apply, can be found in accordance with the law as a crime of illegal business.
文摘在互联网大背景下,网购已经成为民众不可或缺的一种生活方式。电商发展势头也逐渐向好,电商在逐利的同时,矛盾也显现出来。一些商家为了打击竞争对手,间接提升自己的利益,采用反向刷单手段来攻击竞争商家的信用评价。一是因为反向刷单隐蔽性和极大社会危害性的特点,二来是电商平台监管不严、主体诚信缺失,还有法律规定模糊,民法、行政法和行业制度对反向刷单的打击并未取得成效,适用刑事手段规制反向刷单行为刻不容缓。学界对反向刷单适用破坏生产经营罪和损害商业信誉、商业声誉罪的争议最大,从实质解释和立法目的出发,再结合时代背景,反向刷单行为适用上述罪名有很大可能。最后从实际出发,结合学者建议,增设新罪名直接保护信用评价机制,或者出台司法解释,同时要加强罚金作用,有效抑制反向刷单现象。Under the background of the Internet, online shopping has become an indispensable way of life for people. The development momentum of e-commerce has gradually improved, and while e-commerce is pursuing profits, contradictions have also emerged. In order to attack competitors, some merchants indirectly enhance their own interests, using reverse brush single means to attack the credit evaluation of competitive merchants. One is because of the hidden nature of reverse brushing and the characteristics of great social harm, the second is the lack of strict supervision of e-commerce platforms, the lack of integrity of the main body, and vague legal provisions, civil law, administrative law and industry system to combat reverse brushing has not achieved results, the application of criminal means to regulate reverse brushing behavior is urgent. The academic circles have the most controversy on the application of reverse brushing to the crime of destroying production and operation and the crime of damaging commercial reputation and commercial reputation. From the substantive interpretation and legislative purpose, combined with the background of The Times, it is very possible to apply the reverse brushing behavior to the above crimes. Finally, from the actual point of view, combined with the suggestions of scholars, the addition of new charges to directly protect the credit evaluation mechanism, or the introduction of judicial interpretation, while strengthening the role of fines, effectively inhibit the phenomenon of reverse brushing.
