The Key to Accurately Distinguishing Between Aiding Crimes and Concealment Crimes in Virtual Money Crime

With the global expansion of Virtual Money, its related legal issues have become increasingly complex, especially in criminal justice practice. The crimes of assisting information network criminal activities (referred to as "assisting crime") and concealing and disguising criminal proceeds (referred to as "concealment crime") are two common charges in the crime chain of Virtual Money, often intersecting and confusing in terms of factual determination and legal application.

This confusion not only affects the judicial authorities' accurate determination of cases but also directly relates to the severity of sentencing for the defendant. Although both of these charges are important tools in criminal law for combating cybercrime and money laundering, there are significant differences in terms of subjective intent, methods of behavior, and sentencing ranges.

This article will conduct an in-depth exploration of how to accurately distinguish between accessory crime and concealment crime in virtual money crimes through case analysis, legal theory analysis, and practical experience, providing practical references for relevant practitioners.

1. Case Analysis

To illustrate the difference between the court's judgment on crimes related to coin assistance and concealment, let's take a practical case. In the concealment case of Chen Si and others judged by the Intermediate People's Court of Jiaozuo City, Henan Province (2022) Yu 08 Xing Zhong 50, the basic facts of the case are as follows:

In December 2020, Li and others, being aware of the situation, organized Chen Si and others to use bank cards to transfer criminal proceeds. Chen Si and others, fully aware, provided bank cards under their names to participate in the transfer (partly through purchasing Virtual Money) and conducted accounting and reconciliation through online groups. Statistics show that the three bank cards provided by Chen Si transferred over 147,000 yuan of the involved funds.

In February 2021, Li and others were arrested. However, Chen Si and others continued to organize others to transfer criminal proceeds using bank cards or by purchasing Virtual Money, involving an amount of over 441,000 yuan.

The first instance court found Chen Si guilty of concealment crime, sentencing him to four years of imprisonment and a fine of 20,000 yuan. Chen Si and his defense lawyer argued that it should constitute a lesser aiding crime, but the second instance court dismissed the appeal and upheld the original judgment.

This case illustrates well the common points of contention among the prosecution, defense, and court regarding the application of the crime of assisting in criminal activities and the crime of concealment when transferring upstream illegal gains through Virtual Money.

2. The Scope of Application of Aiding and Concealing in Criminal Cases in the Coin Circle

In criminal cases within the coin industry, the applicable boundaries of the crime of assisting and the crime of concealment are usually closely related to the role positioning of the actor, the degree of subjective understanding, and the consequences of the actions. Although both crimes require the actor to be "aware," a careful examination reveals that there are significant differences in the applicable scenarios of the two crimes:

(1) Typical Application Scenarios of Assisting Crime

The crime of assisting refers to the act of knowingly providing technical support, promoting, directing traffic, facilitating payment settlement, network storage, communication transmission, and other assistance to others who use the information network to commit crimes. In the context of the crypto space, common acts of assisting include:

1. Assist scam groups in collecting coins and transferring coins;
2. Knowing that it is "black U" or dirty money yet still providing address transfer services;
3. Provide a virtual money wallet address for "running points" or transfer.

The key point of this crime lies in the "assistance" 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 criminals in handling "proceeds of crime", specifically manifested in the behavior of the actor knowing that it is criminally obtained or its proceeds, yet still assisting in transferring, acquiring, holding on behalf of, exchanging, etc. Common manifestations include:

1. Acquire virtual money obtained by others through fraud.
2. Knowing it is money laundering, still engage in "coin washing" or exchange it for fiat currency;
3. Custody, withdrawal and other actions.

The concealment of crime emphasizes the actor's assistance in "digesting stolen property," which is closer to the traditional meaning of "money laundering." The premise is a clear understanding of the criminal proceeds.

Therefore, the applicable boundaries of the two crimes lie in the stage at which the act occurs, the subject of subjective knowledge, and whether the act directly contributes to the success of the crime or deals with the results of the crime afterwards.

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

Accurately distinguishing between these two offenses requires a comprehensive judgment that combines subjective mindset, objective behavior, and objective evidence of the case; it cannot simply rely on applying the offense names. The following three aspects are crucial:

(1) The subjectively known object is different.

1. Aiding and Abetting Crime: The actor must be aware of "others using information networks to commit crimes" itself. That is: knowing that others are engaged in online illegal activities such as telecom fraud, gambling, and infringing on citizens' personal information (it is sufficient to have a general awareness), and still providing assistance.

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

In other words, the "knowledge" in the crime of aiding and abetting refers to awareness of the criminal act itself, while the "knowledge" in the crime of concealment refers to 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 completion of the crime and serve to "clean the stolen goods."

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

(3) Whether it constitutes the completion of a crime.

Concealment behaviors often have a strong causal relationship with the criminal results. For example, without the transfer of funds, the scam group cannot liquidate their assets. Although the crime of aiding and abetting also involves helping upstream crimes to "cash out" their profits, it does not determine whether the upstream crime can be established.

For defense attorneys, they can approach the defense from the following two levels:

The first is the evidence level: it is necessary to focus on analyzing the methods by which the actor obtains coins, whether communication records mention upstream crimes, and whether there is an intention to "cleanse" the coin's direction.

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," consideration should be given to applying the crime of aiding and abetting, arguing for "minor offense" treatment.

4. Conclusion

Under the support of technologies such as high anonymity of Virtual Money, ease of cross-border transactions, and decentralization, the difficulty of applying criminal law has significantly increased, and the boundaries between accessory crime and concealment crime are becoming increasingly blurred. However, it is precisely in this blurred boundary that criminal lawyers in the Web3 field should take on the role of "legal translators," not only mastering the techniques of traditional criminal defense but also deeply understanding the underlying logic and practical uses of coins.

From the perspective of criminal policy, the precise application of light and heavy criminal charges relates 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 crimes and concealing crimes directly determines the fate trajectory of the individuals involved.

In the future, with the further standardization of judicial practices and the gradual improvement of the legal system for virtual money, the application of law 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 the professional ability and sense of responsibility of lawyers.