The Distinction Between Assistance Crimes and Concealment Crimes in Virtual Money Crimes

With the global development of Virtual Money, the legal issues related to it are becoming increasingly complex, especially in criminal justice practice. The crimes of aiding information network criminal activities (referred to as "aiding crime") and concealing or disguising criminal proceeds and the crime of profits from criminal activities (referred to as "concealment crime") are two common charges in the Virtual Money crime chain, often resulting in overlap and confusion in practical applications.

This confusion not only affects the accurate determination of the case but also directly relates to the severity of the sentencing. Although both crimes are important tools for combating cybercrime and money laundering, there are significant differences in terms of subjective intent, methods of conduct, and the range of sentencing.

I. Case Analysis

Taking the case of Chen Si and others concealed in the judgment of the Intermediate People's Court of Jiaozuo City, Henan Province as an example, the case details are as follows:

In December 2020, Li Gang and others organized Chen Si and others to transfer criminal proceeds using bank cards. Chen Si provided his own bank card to participate in the transfer, part of which was done by purchasing Virtual Money. According to statistics, the 3 bank cards provided by Chen Si transferred over 147,000 yuan in telecom fraud funds.

In February 2021, after Li Gang and others were arrested, Chen Si and others continued to organize the transfer of criminal proceeds, involving an amount of over 441,000 yuan.

The first-instance court found Chen Si guilty of concealment and sentenced him to four years in prison, along with a fine of 20,000 yuan. Chen Si and his defense lawyer believed that it should constitute the lesser crime of aiding and abetting, but the second-instance court rejected the appeal and upheld the original judgment.

2. The Scope of Application of the Crime of Assisting and the Crime of Concealment

In criminal cases involving Virtual Money, the applicable boundaries of the two offenses are closely related to the role of the actor, their subjective understanding, and the consequences of their actions:

Typical scenarios of coin fraud.

1. Assist fraud groups in collecting coins and transferring coins.
2. Knowingly providing address transfer services from illegal sources.
3. Provide a virtual money wallet address for "racing points" or transfer.

The key lies in the fact that "helping" behaviors directly facilitate cybercrime, without the need to aim for profit.

Typical scene of hiding a crime

1. Acquire virtual money obtained by others through telecom fraud.
2. Knowing it to be illegal gains, still engaging in "money laundering" or exchanging it for fiat currency.
3. Custody, withdrawal, and other activities

Concealing a crime emphasizes helping to "digest stolen goods," which is closer to the traditional concept of money laundering, provided that there is a clear understanding of the criminal proceeds.

3. How to Accurately Distinguish Between Aiding and Abetting Crimes and Concealment Crimes

Accurately distinguishing between these two offenses requires a comprehensive consideration of subjective mentality, objective behavior, and case evidence:

The subjectively known object is different.

1. The crime of aiding and abetting: The perpetrator must be aware of "others committing crimes using information networks."
2. Concealment Crime: The actor must have knowledge that "the property handled is criminal proceeds."

The timing of the behavior occurrence is different.

1. The crime of aiding and abetting often occurs during or before the commission of a crime, playing a "supporting role."
2. Concealment crimes usually occur after the crime has been completed, serving the purpose of "laundering stolen goods."

Does ### constitute the completion of a crime?

Concealment behavior often has a strong causal relationship with the outcome of a crime, and while the crime of aiding may help "realize the profits" of upstream crimes, it does not determine whether upstream crimes can be established.

Suggestions for Judicial Practice

For defense lawyers, you can start from the following two levels:

1. Evidence Level: Analyze the methods of acquiring coins, whether communication records mention upstream crimes, and whether there is an intention to "clean" the coin's direction.
2. Subjective aspect: If the defendant truly did not know that the upstream behavior was a crime, only knowing that "this coin is not clean", it may be considered to claim applicability of the crime of aiding and abetting.

Conclusion

Under the influence of the technical characteristics of Virtual Money, the difficulty of applying criminal law has significantly increased. Criminal lawyers in the Web3 field need to deeply understand the underlying logic and practical uses of coins, accurately distinguishing between aiding and abetting crimes and concealment crimes in the blurred boundaries. This not only relates to the restraint of law and the realization of justice but also directly affects the fate trajectories of the individuals involved.

In the future, with the normalization of judicial practices and the improvement of the legal system for virtual money, the application of relevant laws will become clearer. Before that, each differentiation of crimes is a test of the professional ability and responsibility of lawyers.