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

With the rapid development of Virtual Money globally, the related legal issues are becoming increasingly complex, especially in the practice of criminal justice. The crimes of assisting information network criminal activities (referred to as "aiding crime") and concealing or disguising criminal proceeds and the crime of benefiting from criminal proceeds (referred to as "concealment crime") are two common offenses in the chain of Virtual Money crimes that often intersect and cause confusion in practical applications.

This confusion not only affects the accurate determination of cases by judicial authorities but also directly relates to the severity of sentencing for the defendant. Although both crimes are important tools in the criminal law's fight against cybercrime and money laundering, there are significant differences in terms of subjective intention, methods of conduct, and sentencing ranges.

This article will conduct an in-depth discussion on how to accurately distinguish between aiding and abetting crimes and concealing crimes in virtual money offenses through case analysis, legal theory analysis, and practical experience, providing practical references for relevant practitioners.

1. Case Introduction

Let's first look at a practical case to see the difference in the court's judgment regarding crimes related to coin assistance and concealment. In the concealment case of Chen Si and others judged by the Intermediate People's Court of Jiaozuo City, Henan Province ((2022) Yu 08 Criminal Final No. 50), the basic case facts are as follows:

In December 2020, Li Ganggang and others, knowing that others needed bank cards to transfer illegal proceeds from criminal activities, organized Chen Si and others to use bank cards to transfer criminal proceeds; Chen Si and others, knowing that Li Ganggang and others were using bank cards to transfer illegal criminal proceeds, provided their real-name registered Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, Agricultural Bank of China, and Postal Bank cards to participate in the transfer (part of which was transferred after purchasing Virtual Money), and conducted bookkeeping and reconciliation through online chat groups. According to the statistics of the investigation agency, the three bank cards provided by Chen Si transferred over 147,000 yuan from telecom fraud.

In February 2021, Li Gang and others were arrested by the public security organs. However, Chen Si and others continued to organize others to use bank cards to transfer funds obtained from violations of the law, or to transfer funds by purchasing Virtual Money, with the amount involved reaching more than 441,000 yuan.

The first-instance court found Chen Si guilty of concealing a crime, sentencing him to four years in prison and imposing a fine of 20,000 yuan.

Chen Si and his defense attorney believe that the first-instance court made an error in the characterization of the case, and that it should be considered a lesser aiding crime rather than a more serious concealment crime. However, the second-instance court did not support the views of the defendant and his lawyer, ultimately rejecting the appeal and upholding the original judgment.

This case illustrates well the common points of contention among the prosecution, defense, and the court when transferring upstream illegal gains through Virtual Money, specifically regarding the applicability of aiding and abetting crimes and concealment crimes.

II. The Scope of Application of Assisting and Concealing in Criminal Cases in the Coin Circle

In criminal cases within the coin circle, the applicable boundaries of the crimes of aiding and abetting and concealing are usually closely related to the actor's role positioning, subjective awareness level, and the consequences of their actions. Although both crimes require the actor to "know," a closer examination reveals that the applicable scenarios for the two crimes actually have significant differences:

(1) Typical application scenarios of aiding and abetting crimes.

The crime of aiding and abetting refers to knowingly providing technical support, promotion, payment settlement, network storage, communication transmission, and other assistance to others who commit crimes using information networks. In the context of the crypto world, common acts of aiding and abetting include:

1. Assist fraud groups in collecting coins and transferring coins;
2. Knowing it is "black U" or dirty money but still providing address transfer services;
3. Provide a virtual money wallet address for "funneling" or transfer.

The key point of this crime lies in the "helping" behavior that directly facilitates information network crimes, without the need for the ultimate purpose of obtaining profits.

(2) Typical Application Scenarios of Concealment Crimes

Concealing crimes focuses more on assisting upstream criminal activities in handling "ill-gotten gains", specifically manifested as the perpetrator knowingly assisting in the transfer, acquisition, holding, or exchange of criminal proceeds or their benefits. Common manifestations include:

1. Acquiring virtual money obtained through telecom fraud from others;
2. Knowing that it is dirty money, still engaging in "money laundering" or exchanging it for fiat currency;
3. Acts of custody, withdrawal, etc.

Concealing crimes emphasizes the actor's assistance in "digesting stolen goods," which is closer to the traditional meaning of "money laundering," with the premise being a clear understanding of the criminal proceeds.

Therefore, the applicable boundaries of the two offenses lie in the stage at which the act occurs, the subjective awareness of the object, and whether the act directly contributes to the success of the crime, or deals with the results of the crime afterward.

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

Accurately distinguishing between these two offenses requires a comprehensive judgment based on subjective mindset, objective behavior, and the objective evidence of the case; it cannot be simply categorized under the offense name. The following three aspects are crucial:

(1) The subject of subjective knowledge is different.

1. Aiding and Abetting Crime: The actor must be aware that "others are committing crimes using information networks". That is: being aware that others are engaging in telecom fraud, gambling, infringing on citizens' personal information, and other online illegal activities (only a general awareness is required), and still providing assistance.

2. Concealment of crime: The actor must have knowledge that "the property being handled is proceeds of crime." That is: it is not necessary to know the specific details of the original criminal act, it is enough to know that "the property or virtual money being handled is illicit funds."

In other words, the "knowledge" in the crime of assisting others in committing a crime refers to the awareness of the criminal act itself, while the "knowledge" in the crime of concealment refers to the awareness of the proceeds of the crime.

(2) The time nodes of the behavior occurrence are different.

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

For example, helping a scammer set up a virtual money wallet and participate in the transfer of funds may constitute an aiding and abetting crime; however, if the scammer has already completed the fraud and hands over the coins to someone else for custody or sale, the other party may then be guilty of concealment.

(3) Whether it constitutes a completed crime

Concealment behavior often has a strong causal relationship with the results of the crime. For example, without running transfers, the funds of the fraud group cannot be cashed out. Although the crime of assisting in illegal activities also involves helping upstream crimes to "monetize profits," it does not determine whether the upstream crime can be established.

For defense attorneys, the defense can be approached from the following two levels:

The first is the evidence level: it is necessary to focus on analyzing how the actor obtains coins, whether communication records mention upstream crimes, and whether there is an intention of "cleaning" the coin's trajectory.

The second is the 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 should be considered to apply the crime of assisting in the crime, advocating for a "minor crime" treatment.

4. Conclusion

Under the support of technologies such as high anonymity, ease of cross-border transactions, and decentralization in virtual money, the difficulty of applying criminal law has significantly increased, and the boundaries between aiding and concealing crimes have become increasingly blurred. However, it is precisely within these blurred boundaries that criminal lawyers in the Web3 field should take on the role of "legal translators," not only mastering the skills of traditional criminal defense but also deeply understanding the underlying logic and practical uses of virtual coins.

From the perspective of criminal policy, the precise application of light and heavy charges is related to the restraint of the law and the realization of justice. From the perspective of personal rights protection, the ability to accurately distinguish between aiding and abetting crimes and concealment crimes directly determines the fate trajectory of those involved.

In the future, with the further standardization of judicial practices and the gradual improvement of the legal system regarding Virtual Money, the application of laws in this field will become clearer. However, before that, each distinction of charges in criminal cases within the coin circle is a severe test of lawyers' professional abilities and sense of responsibility.