Distinction Between the Crime of Facilitating Cybercrime Through Payment/Settlement Activities and the Crime of Concealing Criminal Proceeds

Abstract

Recently, the crime of assisting in the operation of an information network criminal group has gradually become a type of "catch-all offence". The objective crimes of assisting in cybercrimes through payment and settlement activities and the crime of concealing criminal proceeds are very similar, and the lack of clarity in their boundaries has been one of the reasons for the rapid development of judicial enforcement in the former. Therefore, we need to set clear criteria to distinguish between the two crimes. Although the crime of assisting in cybercrime is provided for separately, it is still an offence of participation and has not changed in nature to that of an accessory. According to the causative theory of complicity, the crime of assisting in cybercrime can only be established after the occurrence of the upstream crime. At the same time, the crime of concealing criminal proceeds can be committed after the completion of the upstream crime, or even when the criminal conduct has been carried out but the crime has not yet been realised. In the overlapping stage of the two offences, it needs to be determined whether both the legal interest infringed by one's conduct and one's subjective knowledge at the time of the act meet the requirements for both crimes under the principle of consistency between subjective and objective elements, and thus which specific crimes should be established.