转移他人支付宝钱款行为定性分析——兼论盗窃罪与诈骗罪的竞合关系

发布时间：2018-06-17 15:19

本文选题：支付宝 + 盗窃罪　；参考：《华东政法大学学报》2017年03期

【摘要】：转移他人支付宝账户钱款的行为不符合诈骗罪中虚构事实与财产处分的特征。在该过程中,支付宝平台没有选择可能,只能根据支付指令转移资金,不符合诈骗罪被骗主体有处分财产选择权的教义属性。根据最高人民法院和最高人民检察院《关于办理妨害信用卡管理刑事案件具体应用法律若干问题的解释》第3款,论证转移支付宝资金的行为构成诈骗罪有循环论证之嫌。实践中从他人微信账户中转移资金、通过偷换商家二维码获取非法利益、从他人股票账户中转移股票、从他人财付通账户中转移钱款等非法行为,一般都依照盗窃罪进行定罪量刑。盗窃罪与诈骗罪不是法条竞合关系,但可以构成想象竞合关系。
[Abstract]:The transfer of other people's Alipay account does not accord with the characteristics of fictitious facts and property disposition in the crime of fraud. In this process, Alipay platform can only transfer funds according to payment instructions, which does not accord with the doctrine that the subject of fraud has the right to dispose of property. According to the third paragraph of the Supreme people's Court and the Supreme people's Procuratorate on the specific application of the law in handling criminal cases against credit card administration, it is considered that the behavior of transferring Alipay funds constitutes a crime of fraud. In practice, it transfers funds from other people's WeChat accounts, obtains illegal profits by changing businesses'QR codes, transfers shares from other people's stock accounts, transfers money from other people's Tenpay accounts, and so on. The conviction and sentence are generally based on the crime of larceny. Larceny and fraud are not the same as laws, but they can form the relationship of imaginative concurrence.
【作者单位】：上海政法学院;
【基金】：2016年中国法学会课题“风险社会下刑事处罚早期化问题研究”(项目号CLS(2016)C17) 2016年最高人民检察院检察理论研究课题“刑事诉讼认罪认罚从宽机制研究”(项目号GJ2016D19)的阶段性研究成果
【分类号】：D924.35

【相似文献】