非法使用他人第三方支付账户资金行为的刑法评价

发布时间：2018-06-28 00:10

本文选题：非法使用 + 第三方支付　；参考：《辽宁大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：近年来,电子商务各种网上实体业务的开展,使得第三方支付成为重要的支付方式,第三方支付平台发挥着不可比拟的作用。实务中经常遇到行为人非法使用他人第三方支付账户资金的行为,对于该行为的定性各地法院在处理结果上不同,有认定盗窃罪的,也有认定诈骗罪的。非法使用他人第三方支付账户资金实际上包含前后两个行为。前行为是指通过各种手段获得他人的第三方支付账户和密码的行为,如盗窃手段、骗取手段、偶然得知等。后行为指未经账户所有人允许而使用该账户资金进行网络购物或转账的行为。这两个行为中前行为既可以是合法的也可以是非法的,但后行为一定是非法的。如果前行为是行为人通过抢劫、盗窃、诈骗等手段获得被害人的智能手机等终端设施从而获取了被害人的第三方支付账户信息,则前行为在符合刑法规定的犯罪时通过传统的犯罪构成理论就可以直接定罪。核心在于后续使用行为应认定为盗窃还是诈骗。本文着重分析后行为,即非法使用行为的定性。本文从具体案件入手,从对案件不同的处理意见中发现问题,进而从刑法理论上分析司法实务中认定盗窃罪或诈骗罪的逻辑路径并讨论不同的处理意见是否合理,最终得出自己的结论:行为人非法使用他人第三方支付账户资金的非法使用行为应以盗窃认定而非诈骗,如果前行为本身构成刑法规定的盗窃罪以外的犯罪则要与盗窃罪数罪并罚;如果前行为本身构成盗窃罪则最终需以盗窃罪一罪论处,数额累计计算。如果前行为并不违法,没有后期使用行为单就前行为不能讨论犯罪,所以后期非法使用行为是核心,以盗窃罪一罪评价即可。
[Abstract]:In recent years, with the development of various online entity business in electronic commerce, third-party payment has become an important payment method, and the third-party payment platform plays an unparalleled role. In practice, we often encounter the behavior of the actor illegally using the third party to pay the funds in the account. For the nature of this behavior, the courts in different places have different results in dealing with the crime of larceny, but also the crime of fraud. The illegal use of other people's third party payment account funds actually contains two acts before and after. Pre-behavior refers to the behavior of obtaining the third party payment account and password of others by various means, such as theft, fraud, accidental knowledge, etc. Post-behavior refers to the use of account funds for online shopping or transfer without the permission of the account owner. The former can be either legal or illegal, but the latter must be illegal. If the previous act is that the perpetrator obtained the victim's smartphone and other terminal facilities by means of robbery, theft, fraud, etc., thereby obtaining the victim's third-party payment account information, In accordance with the criminal law, the former act can be directly convicted by the traditional theory of constitution of crime. The core lies in whether the subsequent use should be regarded as theft or fraud. This paper focuses on the analysis of post-behavior, that is, the characterization of illegal use. This article starts with the concrete case, finds the problem from the different treatment opinion of the case, then theoretically analyzes the logical path of the crime of larceny or fraud in the judicial practice from the criminal law theory, and discusses whether the different treatment opinion is reasonable or not. Finally, it comes to its own conclusion: the illegal use of other people's third party to pay account funds should be identified by theft rather than fraud. If the former act itself constitutes a crime other than larceny stipulated in criminal law, it should be punished with the crime of larceny; if the former act itself constitutes a crime of larceny, the crime of larceny should eventually be punished, and the amount of accumulated amount shall be calculated. If the former behavior is not illegal, the former behavior can not discuss the crime without the later use behavior sheet, so the late illegal use behavior is the core, and can be evaluated by the crime of larceny.
【学位授予单位】：辽宁大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D924.3

【参考文献】