General principles of civil law game virtual currency
2, if the public security organs suspect the criminal detention, the procuratorate can not approve the arrest, they should apply for l pending trial. Bail pending trial also goes through the court
the seventy-seventh provision of the criminal procere law stipulates that the people's court, the people's Procuratorate and the public security organ shall not exceed twelve months for the suspect and defendant to be l, and the longest residence shall not exceed six months.
ring the period of l pending trial and residential surveillance, the investigation, prosecution and trial of the case shall not be interrupted. If it is found that criminal responsibility should not be investigated or the term of l pending trial or residential surveillance has expired, the l pending trial or residential surveillance shall be lifted in time. In case of cancellation of l pending trial or residential surveillance, the person who has been led pending trial or residential surveillance and the relevant units shall be informed in time.
According to the news on February 10, 2018, on September 4, 2017, seven ministries and commissions of the people's Republic of China issued the notice on preventing the financing risk of token issuance, which regulates the issuance of tokens. In the notice, the nature of all kinds of tokens and "virtual currency" is clearly defined: it is not issued by the monetary authority, and it has no monetary attributes such as legal compensation and mandatory, It does not have the same legal status as currency and cannot and should not be used as currency in the market. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that all kinds of "virtual currency" still have a certain property value and are part of the property of the holder. So, how to identify the nature of the theft of such tokens
In order to protect the legitimate rights and interests of "virtual token" holders, the author intends to discuss such issues through a relevant news report and relevant casesstealing bitcoin
recently, a news report said that Haidian police in Beijing cracked a case of destroying computer information system. The suspect Zhong used his administrator's authority to modify the company's computer applications and steal 100 bitcoins. Before he could sell the stolen money, Zhong was arrested by the police. At present, Zhong was detained for the crime of destroying computer information system
it can be seen from the report that the police detained the perpetrator for stealing bitcoin on suspicion of damaging the computer information system. The crime of destroying the computer information system stipulated in Article 286 of the criminal law of our country refers to the act of deleting, modifying, adding or interfering with the functions of the computer information system in violation of the provisions of the state, resulting in the abnormal operation of the computer information system and serious consequences, or deleting, modifying or interfering with the data and application programs stored, processed or transmitted in the computer information system Modifying or adding operations with serious consequences, or deliberately making or spreading destructive programs such as computer viruses, which affect the normal operation of the computer system with serious consequences
In the author's opinion, this crime is one of the crimes of impairing social management order in Chapter 6 of the criminal law, that is, the legal interest protected by this crime is actually the public order of our society, not the property interests of the digital currency holders, which in fact denies the property value of digital currency, It is only protected as a data or system function in a computer system. The author thinks that there is some irrationality in this wayfirst of all, in the notice on the prevention of bitcoin risk issued in 2013, it is mentioned that bitcoin is not a real currency because it is not issued by the monetary authority and does not have such monetary attributes as legal compensation and compulsion. Bitcoin has four main characteristics: no centralized issuers, limited amount, no geographical restrictions and anonymity. Because it belongs to a specific virtual commodity in nature The notice also clearly mentioned that bitcoin does not have the same legal status as currency and should not be used as currency in the market. However, as a virtual commodity, the property value behind bitcoin cannot be ignored
Secondly, Article 127 of the general provisions of the civil law, which came into effect on October 1 last year, stipulates that if the law has provisions on the protection of data and network virtual property, such provisions shall prevail. Although only the protection of the network virtual property has made the principle provisions, but it can not be denied that this shows our country's attitude towards the protection of the network virtual property. Although there is no special law for the protection of data and network virtual property in China, from the perspective of the general provisions of civil law, it is predicted that there will be relevant legislation in the futurefinally, from the relevant cases, we can also see the recognition of the property attribute of virtual currency such as bitcoin in China's judicial practice. In April and may 2013, Liu premeditated to set up a bitcoin trading platform, so he recruited Jin and Huang (both sentenced) to jointly set up a "bitcoin" trading platform. During this period, Liu, Huang, Jin, Jin and the defendant he, in addition to other acts of directly stealing customers' funds, also frequently cashed RMB by selling customers' bitcoins, and transferred 120 bitcoins from the website. Finally, the court convicted and punished the defendant for fraud, and the bitcoin transferred by the defendant was also included in the property loss of the victim. Therefore, from the judicial cases, we can also get the recognition of the property attributes of virtual currency such as bitcoin
based on the above reasons, the author thinks that it may be unreasonable to regulate the theft of virtual currency only as the crime of damaging computer information system. We should face up to the hidden property value and consider the application of the crime of infringing property in China's criminal law. Only in this way can we effectively protect the legitimate rights and property of digital currency holders in China
The theft of virtual currency belongs to the act of theft, and a large amount of it constitutes the crime of theft
the general principles of civil law has listed virtual wealth as "valuable wealth", which is protected by law. Therefore, stealing wealth protected by law is theft
"general principles of civil law" stipulates that Article 127 where there are provisions on the protection of data and network virtual property in law, such provisions shall prevail
from your specific situation, it doesn't constitute theft, because you can't prove that the game account belongs to you. If you use someone else's ID card to bind it, you dare to make money. The police can't control it any more. If you have the leisure, you can go to the court with a lawyer to fight a lawsuit. This is an economic dispute caused by unclear ownership, not a criminal case< br />
virtual currency has been included in the scope of legal property in the general provisions of civil law, so it should be considered as property. However, virtual currency is generally registered on the Internet in the name of an indivial. According to the information on the Internet, it is personal property. Only if it can be proved that it belongs to the joint property of husband and wife, it can be divided< According to the general provisions of the civil law, Article 127 of the law shall apply to the protection of data and network virtual property.
It is still controversial whether the illegal sale of game currency involves the property stipulated in the criminal law, how to define it in the criminal law, and whether it should be regarded as theft
according to the research opinion of the Research Office of the Supreme People's Court on how to determine the nature of the profit from the illegal sale of other people's game coins by using computers, game coins are not property in the traditional sense. At present, the illegal sale of other people's game coins by using computers should be punished as the crime of illegally obtaining computer information system data
in 2013, the Supreme People's court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate issued the interpretation on Several Issues concerning the application of law in handling criminal cases of theft. Supreme law note: in the process of drafting the interpretation, some people suggested that it should be made clear in the interpretation that those who steal game currency and other fictitious property should be convicted and punished as theft. After research, it is considered that this opinion is inappropriate. For the behavior of stealing virtual property, if it really needs criminal law regulation, it can be convicted and punished according to illegal access to computer information system data and other computer crimes instead of being treated as theft
However, looking at the judicial precedents in recent years, there are also judgments on the conviction of stealing game currency as theft. Some courts hold that the crime of illegally entering a game account for the purpose of theft, as well as the crime of theft and illegal acquisition of computer information system data, belongs to imaginative joinder of offenses, which should be punished as a felony, but it should be determined according to the amount of illegal income combined with specific cases. In theory, it tends to think that virtual property such as game currency should be regarded as property and can be used as the object of theft. The general principles of civil law has also written the network virtual property into the law. However, the relevant norms still need to be improved"As a minor, his cognitive ability is limited, and the amount of consumption is huge, which is not within the scope of his right to deal with. Such a game contract is invalid." Wang Yi, a lawyer from Inner Mongolia Qingsheng law firm, said that according to the Interim Administrative Measures for online games and other relevant regulations, online game virtual currency trading service enterprises are not allowed to provide trading services to minors
Wang Yi reminded that parents must pay attention to collecting transaction records, and determine the transaction time, transaction number, transaction account and other details. The most important thing is that parents should prove that minors are playing mobile games ring the transactionArticle 18 alts are persons with full capacity for civil conct and can independently perform civil legal acts
a minor over the age of 16 who lives mainly from his own labor income is regarded as a person with full capacity for civil conct
Article 19 A minor over the age of eight is a person with limited capacity for civil conct, and the execution of a civil juristic act shall be represented by his or her legal representative or with the consent and ratification of his or her legal representative. However, he or she may independently perform a civil juristic act of pure benefit or a civil juristic act appropriate to his or her age and intelligence
Article 20 a minor under the age of eight is a person without capacity for civil conct, who shall be represented by his legal representative to perform civil legal acts< Article 21 an alt who is unable to identify his or her own conct is a person without capacity for civil conct, and his or her legal representative shall perform the civil juristic act on his or her behalf
If a minor over eight years old is unable to identify his own behavior, the provisions of the preceding paragraph shall apply.