第三方支付平台下转移财产行为的定性
The Qualitative Analysis of Property Transfer under Third-Party Payment Platform
DOI: 10.12677/ass.2024.139816, PDF,   
作者: 王姝涵:苏州大学王健法学院,江苏 苏州
关键词: 第三方支付平台财产性利益盗窃罪诈骗罪Third Party Payment Platform Property Interests Larceny Fraud
摘要: 随着新型支付方式多样化,第三方支付平台内的侵财行为愈演愈烈。目前主要有诈骗说、信用卡诈骗说以及盗窃说三种观点。第三方支付平台作为用户和银行之间周转资金的机构,虽具有金融机构相关的功能,但其性质仍属于非金融机构。其次,用户将银行卡绑定在第三方支付平台,用户与平台之间基于保管合同,平台只是用户与银行之间的中间机构,对钱款没有处分权限,只有用户发出相关指令,平台才能进行相关操作。银行与用户之间基于存款合同,银行对用户的存款享有所有权,用户享有的是存款债权。本文主要通过研究第三方支付平台的运作模式,推导出第三方支付平台不能成为诈骗罪的对象。同时,通过对犯罪行为的研究,判断出其符合盗窃罪的构成要件,进一步对网络侵财行为进行准确定性。
Abstract: With the diversification of new payment methods, the behavior of encroachment on money in third-party payment platforms is becoming more and more serious. At present, there are three kinds of views about this kind of crime: fraud, credit card fraud and theft. As an institution that connects with banks and transfers funds between users and banks, the third-party payment platform has many functions identical with financial institutions, but it still belongs to non-financial institutions in legal nature according to relevant regulations. Secondly, the user binds the bank card to the third-party payment platform, and the relationship between the user and the platform is based on the custody contract. The platform is only an intermediary between the user and the bank, and has no right to dispose of the money. Based on the deposit contract between the bank and the user, the bank has the ownership of the user’s deposit, and the user has the creditor’s right to the deposit. This paper focuses on analyzing the qualitative disputes of theft and fraud in the behavior of stealing money under the third-party payment platform. This paper studies the operation mode of the third-party payment platform, and deduces that the third-party payment platform does not have the qualification to be cheated, and does not have the authority to dispose of property, so it cannot become the object of fraud. At the same time, through the study of the criminal behavior, it is judged that it conforms to the constitutive elements of theft, so as to further conduct an accurate qualitative analysis of the behavior of stealing money online.
文章引用:王姝涵. 第三方支付平台下转移财产行为的定性[J]. 社会科学前沿, 2024, 13(9): 320-326. https://doi.org/10.12677/ass.2024.139816

参考文献

[1] 安徽省淮北市中级人民法院. (2020)皖06刑终124号刑事判决书[EB/OL].
https://www.pkulaw.com/pfnl/a6bdb3332ec0adc4e5ea7834a744ba08dfa5f13d6bfe0c68bdfb.html?keyword=%282020%29%E7%9A%9606%20%E5%88%91%E7%BB%88124%20%E5%8F%B7&way=listView#anchor-documentno, 2020-08-25.
[2] 郭华. 互联网金融犯罪概说[M]. 北京: 法律出版社, 2015: 26.
[3] 李迎春. 第三方支付环境下侵财案件的刑法定性研讨[J]. 法律适用, 2017(22): 86-92.
[4] 中国人民银行. 非金融机构支付服务管理办法[J]. 中华人民共和国国务院公报, 2010(30): 48-53.
[5] 王国平. 论新型支付方式下网络侵财犯罪行为的司法认定——以利用第三方支付平台取财为研究范例[J]. 政法学刊, 2021, 38(2): 5-12.
[6] 刘宪权. 论新型支付方式下网络侵财犯罪的定性[J]. 社会科学文摘, 2017(10): 77-79.
[7] 吴波. 秘密转移第三方支付平台资金行为的定性——以支付宝为例[J]. 华东政法大学学报, 2017, 20(3): 97-102.
[8] 刘明祥. 再论用信用卡在ATM机上恶意取款的行为性质——与张明楷教授商榷[J]. 清华法学, 2009, 3(1): 74-86.
[9] 姜涛. 网络型诈骗罪的拟制处分行为[J]. 中外法学, 2019, 31(3): 692-712.
[10] 最高人民检察院关于拾得他人信用卡并在自动柜员机(ATM机)上使用的行为如何定性问题的批复[J]. 司法业务文选, 2008(19): 48.
[11] 刘宪权. 盗窃信用卡并使用行为定性的困境与破解[J]. 法学评论, 2018, 36(6): 36-44.
[12] 张明楷. 论盗窃财产性利益[J]. 中外法学, 2016(6): 1405-1442.
[13] 钱叶六. 存款占有的归属与财产犯罪的界限[J]. 中国法学, 2019(2): 221-238.