Translator:Wang Qiyu
Introduction:
Suspect Zhao operated a network technology company that provided a live streaming platform to lower-level agents for online live streaming business. They recruited Li as customer service and hired Chen and Liu aCách chơi xì dách luôn thắngechnical personnel. Despite knowing that the lower-level agents were using the platform for telecom network fraud, these individuals provided technical support, platform services, and payment settlement serviceCách chơi xì dách luôn thắngo them.
The lower-level agents utilized the live streaming platform to engage in fraudulent activities. Using fabricated female broadcaster identities, they interacted with victims online through voice and video chats. They employed tactics such as arranging meetings, love confessions, and ambiguous conversations to lead victims into live streaming rooms. During the live streaming process, they used strategies like Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot;banishing trolls,Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot; Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot;anchor competitions,Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot; and Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot;task completionCách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot; to deceive victims into recharging their accounts and sending virtual gifts, ultimately tricking victims into giving away their money.
Role Classification and Fraud Techniques:
(I) Role Classification
(II) Fraud Techniques
Logic of Criminal Offense:
(I) Determining Criminal Boundary of Live Streaming Tips
The income of online anchors largely stems from viewer tips. To garner more tips, anchors strive to please viewers for increased rewards. What iCách chơi xì dách luôn thắnghe criminal threshold in this context?
The boundary rests on whether viewer tips, whether from recharging or gifting, are voluntary and not obtained through deception. If these actions are voluntary, the anchor's profits are legitimate. If they aren't truly voluntary but rather due to deception, it constitutes fraud.
For instance, in the above case:
It's important to first establish that the agents under the platform constitute fraud. The main reasons are:
(II) Establishing Fraud for Technical Personnel
Given the earlier establishment of the agents' fraudulence, the next step iCách chơi xì dách luôn thắngo prove the platform's subjective awareness of this, thus constituting fraud. Subsequently, showing that platform employees were aware of this situation establisheCách chơi xì dách luôn thắngheir complicity in the fraud.
Subjective Knowing Determination:
According to Article 4 of the Supreme Court's Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot;Opinions on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Handling of Criminal Cases Involving Telecommunications and Internet Fraud,Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot; joint crimes and subjective intent are established. The third subsection stipulates that if someone knows that another person is committing telecommunications and internet fraud and falls under certain circumstances, they shall be treated as joint offenders, except as otherwise provided by laws and judicial interpretations.
Subsection 5 stateCách chơi xì dách luôn thắnghat providing technical support such as internet access, server hosting, network storage, communication transmission, or assisting with payment settlement qualifies.
The phrase Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot;knows that another person is committing the crimeCách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot; should be evaluated in conjunction with the defendant's cognitive abilities, past experiences, behavior frequency and methods, relationships with others, gains made, whether they've been punished for telecommunications and internet fraud, and whether they intentionally evaded investigation, etc., to comprehensively determine.
Understanding Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot;Knowingly... Committing a CrimeCách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot;:
Determining shared guilt in fraud involves subjective elements. Based on specific circumstances, it can be categorized into three types:
In practice, judicial authorities primarily use presumptions to determine whether technical personnel had Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot;knowinglyCách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot; participated, in order to establish the type of crime they committed. Factors to consider include:
In practice, judicial authorities, apart from considering the listed factors, also examine the defendant's statements and those of co-defendants. Consistency, stability, and logical coherence in the defendant's statements are assessed, along with the ability to corroborate testimonies among co-defendants. Additionally, evidence such as WeChat and QQ chat records, money flow and profit situations, work history, etc., are comprehensively evaluated to ascertain whether the defendant was Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot;knowinglyCách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot; involved or aware of others committing telecommunications and internet fraud, thereby determining whether the individual is an accomplice to the crime of telecommunications and internet fraud. If no objective evidence establishes Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot;knowingly,Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot; the suspect should be charged with aiding information network criminal activities.
Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắngtrategy:
For the defense of technical personnel, the main focus revolves around proving or disproving the element of Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot;subjective knowledge,Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot; which is pivotal in determining guilt versus innocence and the nature of the offense. Consider the following aspects:
The Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnghould aim to disprove or mitigate the factors contributing to the establishment of "knowingly," thus influencing the charges or verdict for the technical personnel.
Introduction to the Lawyer:
Wang Ren
Since commencing legal practice in 2012, Wang Ren has been dedicated to the study of criminal defense and criminal compliance. He has handled numerous criminal cases of various types and levels, including high-impact cases in Shanghai and even across the country. His expertise lies notably in the fields of financial crimes, commercial crimes, and intellectual property crimes, where he has accumulated extensive practical experience. He has participated in programs such as Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot;Legal WorldCách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot; and Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot;Baoshan Radio,Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot; where he provided analysis on trending legal issues like the Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot;Nanchang Honggu Bay Event,Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot; Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot;Scam Cases,Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot; and Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot;Illegal Fundraising in P2P Internet Finance.Cách chơi xì dách luôn thắnguot; Leveraging his comprehensive criminal practice experience, Wang Ren offers specialized legal services in criminal compliance, anti-fraud, and anti-commercial bribery for enterprises' operation and management. His unique and professional insights have allowed him to promptly mitigate criminal legal risks for project companies, earning clients' trust.
Wang Ren's notable cases include:
These achievements underscore Wang Ren's exceptional skills and proficiency in navigating complex criminal cases and his unwavering commitment to defending his clients' in
兰迪律师官方微信
兰迪全球官方微信