【案例评析】向他人推荐购买和销售虚拟数字货币构成非法经营罪吗？

【基本案情】

Basic case

    曾某在2017年通过微信朋友圈接触到了虚拟货币，因“世联资产”虚拟货币一路上涨，曾某便加入到相应的微信群，并购买了部分“世联资产”虚拟数字货币。2018年2月向被害人洪某等人介绍“世联资产”虚拟数字货币，并承诺该种数字货币只涨不跌。曾某向洪某等人承诺购买的“世联资产”数字货币需要100天返还，每天返还1%。洪某等人均在手机上安装了类似股票交易的APP，可以实时看到虚拟数字货币的行情，前期也可以自行买卖，但不久后软件总会时不时提示要更新，无法顺利实现买卖。曾某叫洪某等人稍安勿躁，还说涨到六七十元前都是白菜价，沉住气坐等发财就好了。但不久后洪某等人发现软件彻底打不开了，此时曾某在外地也根本见不到人影。于是洪某等人到当地公安报警，不久曾某被抓获。在曾某被抓获前，洪某等人介绍或帮亲戚从曾某处购买虚拟数字货币，总金额约66.4万元。

  &nsp; &nsp; &nsp; A virtual currency was contacted in 2017 through a community of friends who had promised to buy it for 100 days and 1% per day. As a result of the rise in the virtual currency of “UNIF” assets, APP, which had been installed on a mobile phone with similar shares, had joined the corresponding microbanks and purchased part of its virtual digital currency. In February 2018, some of the victims were introduced to HUNH’s virtual digital currency, and promised that the digital currency would not rise. Some of the “Universal Assets” that had been promised to HUNH and others had been paid back 100 days, and one of them had to sit back 1% a day.

【案件分歧】

Case Dissenting

    曾某向他人推荐购买和销售虚拟数字货币的行为应如何定性？

& ensp; & ensp; & ensp; & ensp; & ensp; what should be the characterization of a previously recommended purchase and sale of virtual digital currency?

    第一种观点认为，曾某虽自身投资了世联资产，但曾某明知自己持有的“世联资产”虚拟数字货币在交易平台上无法正常交易提现，仍以“世联资产”虚拟数字货币只涨不跌为噱头，诱导投资人进行虚拟数字货币投资来骗取他人钱财，其行为应认定为诈骗罪。

    &nsp;   &nsp; the first view is that a person who had invested his own assets in the Federation, but who knew that a virtual digital currency of the Federation held his own, could not be cashed on a trading platform, continued to rely on the virtual digital currency of the United Nations assets as a prelude to rising or not falling, and induced investors to invest in virtual digital money in order to extort money from others, whose conduct should be criminalized as fraud.

    第二种观点认为，“世联资产”虚拟数字货币所谓的交易平台是人为操控，通过操纵价格使币价一路炒高，但是币从钱包里不能一次释放，前期还能每天释放0.5%至1%,后期则打不开软件APP。曾某对做着一夜暴富的发财梦对“世联资产”虚拟数字货币进行投资并打着只涨不跌的幌子去拉投资，曾某向他人推荐购买虚拟数字货币和向他人销售虚拟数字货币的行为应认定为组织、领导传销活动罪。

    &   and &ensp. Second, the view is that the so-called trading platform for the “UNIF assets” virtual digital currency is artificially manipulated, with prices being manipulated so as to increase the value of the currency, but that the currency cannot be released once from the wallet, with 0.5 to 1 per cent per day being released in the previous period, and the software APP not being opened at a later stage. An investment in the “UNWF assets” virtual digital currency in an all-nightly rich dream and under the guise of a rising and unflinching investment is considered a crime of organizing and leading distribution activities.

    第三种观点认为，曾某明知 “世联资产”虚拟数字货币不能在中国销售，仍大量购买了“世联资产”虚拟数字货币并向他人推荐购买和销售，严重扰乱市场经济秩序，其行为应认定为非法经营罪。

A third view is that a person who, knowing that the virtual digital currency of “UNIF assets” cannot be sold in China, purchased and recommended for sale the virtual digital currency of “UNIF assets” in large quantities, seriously disrupts the market economic order, should be found guilty of illegal operations.

【案件评析】

Case assessment

    笔者同意第三种观点，主要理由如下：

& ensp; & ensp; & ensp; & ensp; & ensp; I agree with the third view for the following main reasons:

    本案中要想给曾某的行为进行准确定性，首先需要对发行“世联资产”虚拟数字货币和交易平台运营人员的行为进行分析认定，其次需要对微信群中向曾某推荐购买和销售“世联资产”虚拟数字货币并告知曾某交易方式方法的人员行为进行分析认定，再次需要对曾某对“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的性质及交易方式方法知情程度进行分析，最后需要对曾某向他人推荐购买和销售虚拟数字货币的主观目的进行分析认定。

    & & & ensp; & ensp; for an accurate characterization of a previous act in this case, the conduct of the operators of the virtual digital currency and the trading platform for the issuance of “UNIF assets” first needs to be analysed, and secondly, the behaviour of the persons in the microgroup who recommended and informed a previous method of purchasing and selling “UNIF assets” virtual digital currency, and again the nature and extent of knowledge of a former “UNIF assets” virtual digital currency, and finally the subjective purpose of recommending the purchase and sale of a virtual digital currency to another person.

    对发行“世联资产”虚拟数字货币和交易平台运营人员的行为进行分析认定首先需要明确中国对虚拟数字货币的性质认定。2013年中国人民银行等五部委发布《关于防范比特币风险的通知》，其中谈到：“比特币不是由货币局发行、不具有法偿性与强制性等货币属性，不是真正意义上的货币。从性质上看，比特币是一种特定的虚拟商品，不具有与货币等同的法律地位，不能且不应作为货币在市场上流通。”2017年中国人民银行等七部委《关于防范代币发行融资风险的公告》：“代币发行融资中使用的代币或‘虚拟货币’不由货币当局发行，不具有法偿性与强制性等货币属性，不具有与货币等同的法律地位，不能也不应该作为货币在市场上流通使用。代币发行融资是指融资主体通过代币的违规发售、流通，向投资者筹集比特币、以太币等所谓‘虚拟货币’，本质上是一种未经批准非法公开融资的行为，涉嫌非法发售代币票券、非法发行证券以及非法集资、金融诈骗、传销等违法犯罪活动。任何所谓的代币融资交易平台不得从事法定货币与代币、‘数字货币’相互之间的兑换业务，不得买卖或作为中央对手方买卖代币或‘数字货币’，不得为代币或‘数字货币’提供定价、信息中介等服务。”

Five ministries, including the People's Bank of China, issued the Notice on Protection against Risk of Bitcoin in 2013, which states that: “bitcoin is not a currency issued by the Monetary Bureau, has no legal and mandatory monetary attributes, is not a currency in the true sense. Bitcoin is by its nature a specific virtual commodity, does not have a legal status equivalent to that of money, cannot and should not circulate as a currency on the market.” Seven ministries, such as the People's Bank of China, in 2017, issued a bulletin on protection against the risk of financing the issuance of coins in exchange: “Demonium or ‘virtual currency’ is not issued by a money authority, has no legal and legal status, such as currency, cannot and should not be used as a currency for circulation, cannot and should not be used as an intermediary in the market, cannot and should not be used as a currency in exchange for the illegal sale, circulation of currency or currency, the illegal sale of currency, or the so-called ‘virtual money’ is an illegal currency, or the sale or purchase of currency, and the illegal sale of currency, or currency, as an illegal currency, and the illegal sale of foreign currency, or foreign currency, is not authorized as a foreign currency.

    明确虚拟数字货币在中国的性质之后，对发行“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的人员和“世联资产”虚拟数字货币交易平台运营人员之间的关系，以及二者利用虚拟数字货币引诱他人投资的行为目的进行分析，才能明确发行“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的人员和“世联资产”虚拟数字货币交易平台运营人员构成何种犯罪。本案中“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的发行人和“世联资产”虚拟数字货币交易平台运营人员以及微信中向曾某贩卖“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的人员均未到案，发行“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的人员与“世联资产”虚拟数字货币交易平台运营人员以及微信中向曾某贩卖“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的人员之间的关系不得而知，如果发行“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的人员和“世联资产”虚拟数字货币交易平台运营人员不是同一批人或者合作关系，则发行“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的人员可能涉嫌构成非法发售代币票券、非法发行证券罪，“世联资产”虚拟数字货币交易平台运营人员则可能单独涉嫌诈骗、集资诈骗、组织、领导传销活动等罪；如果发行“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的人员和“世联资产”虚拟数字货币交易平台运营人员是同一批人或者合作关系，二者合谋以“世联资产”虚拟数字货币来实施犯罪活动，则因具体的犯罪方式方法不同共同构成相应的犯罪，如主要是在不同地方发动多人去拉投资，以发展下线投资而从中获利则可能共同构成组织、领导传销活动罪；如以“世联资产”虚拟数字货币只涨不跌为噱头，诱导投资人进行虚拟数字货币投资却不能正常提现交易，从而达到非法占有他人财产的目的，则可能共同构成诈骗罪。

    &     after it became clear that the virtual digital currency was of a Chinese nature, the relationship between the person who issued the virtual digital currency “the assets of the World Federation” and the operator of the virtual digital money exchange platform “the assets of the World Federation” was not included in the microletter, the person who issued the virtual digital currency “the assets of the World Federation” and the operator of the virtual digital money trading platform “the assets of the World Federation” were not present in the case, and the persons who used the virtual digital money exchange platform “the assets of the World Federation” were not present in the case of the virtual digital money exchange platform operators of the “the assets of the World Federation” were not present in the case of the virtual digital money exchange platform operators of the United States”, the persons who “the assets of the Federation” were not in the case of the “digitized assets of the United States” were not in the case of the “digitized assets of the United States”, the persons who were suspected of selling the assets of the United States, and those who were likely to exploit the virtual digitally sold the assets of the virtual digital currency of the United States, and the virtual money trading platform of the United States, if those that could be used as a virtual money for the purpose of the business business business of the net of the business of the United States, but were not in the business of the virtual money business of the United States.

    明确了发行“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的人员和“世联资产”虚拟数字货币交易平台运营人员可能构成的犯罪，再对微信群中向曾某推荐购买和销售“世联资产”虚拟数字货币并告知曾某交易方式方法的人员的行为进行分析认定明确其行为构成何种犯罪，进而最终分析曾某构成何种犯罪。如果微信群中向曾某推荐购买和销售“世联资产”虚拟数字货币并告知曾某交易方式方法的人员如果是发行“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的人员或“世联资产”虚拟数字货币交易平台运营人员的一员，微信群中向曾某推荐购买和销售“世联资产”虚拟数字货币并告知曾某交易方式方法的人员与发行“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的人员或“世联资产”虚拟数字货币交易平台运营人员属共同犯罪，构成诈骗罪或者组织、领导传销罪，此时曾某如果明确知晓“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的买卖行为构成何种犯罪而仍向他人推荐购买和销售“世联资产”虚拟数字货币则曾某与微信群向其推荐购买和销售“世联资产”虚拟数字货币人员具有共同的犯意属共同犯罪，构成诈骗罪或者组织、领导传销罪；曾某如果不明确知晓发行“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的人员或“世联资产”虚拟数字货币交易平台运营人员利用“世联资产”虚拟数字货币来实施犯罪，曾某只是明知 “世联资产”虚拟数字货币不能在中国销售仍大量购买了“世联资产”虚拟数字货币并向他人推荐购买和销售，曾某的行为构成非法经营罪。如果微信群中向曾某推荐购买和销售“世联资产”虚拟数字货币人员同曾某一样也是因为做着一夜暴富的发财梦被骗去投资去向他人推荐购买和销售“世联资产”虚拟数字货币，此时向曾某推荐购买和销售“世联资产”虚拟数字货币人员和曾某构成一样罪名，均构成非法经营罪。本案中，因只有曾某一个人到案， “世联资产”虚拟数字货币的发行人、“世联资产”虚拟数字货币交易平台运营人员以及微信中向曾某贩卖“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的人员均未到案，只能采信有利于曾某的证据，认定曾某不是“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的发行人或者“世联资产”虚拟数字货币交易平台运营人员一员，对“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的发行人或者“世联资产”虚拟数字货币交易平台运营人员的犯罪行为并不知情，曾某只是明知 “世联资产”虚拟数字货币不能在中国销售，仍大量购买了“世联资产”虚拟数字货币并向他人推荐购买和销售，其行为构成非法经营罪。

    &     Clarifying crimes that may be committed by persons who issue virtual digital currency for “the assets of the World Federation” and those who operate virtual digital money trading platforms for “the assets of the World Federation”, and analysing the behaviour of persons in micro-groups who recommend methods for purchasing and selling virtual digital currency for a transaction, and informing those who have recommended methods for the purchase and sale of “the assets of the World Federation” and, if those in micro-groups who recommend the purchase and sale of virtual digital currency for the assets of the World Federation or the virtual digital money trading platform for the purchase of assets for the sale of the assets of the United States of America and the virtual money trading platform for the sale of the assets of the United States of the United States of America and the virtual money trading platform for the sale of the assets of the United States of America.

    最后，本案中认定曾某的行为构成非法经营罪只是因为该案只有曾某一个人到案，没有足够的证据证明曾某构成诈骗罪或者组织、领导传销罪等其他犯罪。至于曾某确是“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的发行人或者“世联资产”虚拟数字货币交易平台运营人员一员，或者明知“世联资产”虚拟数字货币的发行人或者“世联资产”虚拟数字货币交易平台运营人员的犯罪行为，仍向他人推荐购买和销售“世联资产”虚拟数字货币，需要待该案其他相关人员到案后查清曾某涉嫌其他罪名的通过启动再审程序重新对曾某行为作出认定。

    &   and   Finally, in the present case, it was found that an act constituted an offence of illegal operation only because the case was committed by only one individual and there was not enough evidence that a crime constituted fraud or organized or led other offences. As for the issuer of a virtual digital currency that was a “UNIF asset” or a member of the operator of the “UNIF asset” virtual digital money trading platform, or the issuer of a virtual digital currency or the operator of a “UNIF asset” virtual digital trading platform, the purchase and sale of a “UNIF asset” virtual digital currency was recommended to others for purchase and sale.