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

With the rapid development of Virtual Money worldwide, related legal issues are becoming 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 and the crime of income from criminal activities (referred to as "concealment crime") are two common offenses in the crime chain of Virtual Money, often leading to overlaps and confusion in fact-finding and legal application.

This confusion not only affects the accurate determination of the case but also directly relates to the severity of the sentencing. Although both of these charges are important tools used by criminal law to combat information network crimes and money laundering activities, there are significant differences in terms of subjective intent, manner of conduct, and sentencing range.

This article will delve into how to accurately distinguish between aiding and abetting crimes and concealment crimes in virtual money offenses, providing practical references for relevant practitioners.

1. Case Study

The following is a practical case that demonstrates the difference between the court's judgment on 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 facts of the case are as follows:

In December 2020, Li Gang and others, knowing that others needed bank cards to transfer illegal criminal proceeds, organized Chen Si and others to use bank cards to transfer criminal proceeds. Chen Si and others, aware of the situation, provided their real-name bank cards to participate in the transfer (partly by purchasing Virtual Money and then transferring), and kept accounts and reconciled through online chat groups. According to statistics, the 3 bank cards provided by Chen Si transferred over 147,000 yuan of fraud funds.

In February 2021, Li Gang and others were arrested. However, Chen Si and others continued to organize others to use bank cards to transfer criminal proceeds, or to transfer funds through the purchase of Virtual Money, with the amount involved exceeding 441,000 yuan.

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

This case illustrates that when transferring upstream illegal gains through Virtual Money, a common point of contention among the prosecution, defense, and judges is the applicability of the crime of aiding and abetting and the crime of concealment.

2. The Scope of Application of Aiding Crimes and Concealment Crimes in Cryptocurrency Criminal Cases

In criminal cases within the coin circle, the applicable boundaries of the aiding crime and the concealing crime are usually closely related to the role positioning of the actor, the degree of subjective awareness, and the consequences of the actions. Although both crimes require the actor to be "aware," a careful examination reveals that the applicable scenarios for the two crimes have significant differences:

(1) Typical Application Scenarios of Assisting in Crime

The crime of assisting refers to the act of knowingly providing technical support, promotion, payment settlement, network storage, communication transmission, and other assistance to others who use information networks to commit crimes. For the cryptocurrency circle, common forms of assisting crimes include:

1. Assist scam groups in collecting coins and transferring coins;
2. Knowingly providing address transfer services for "black U" or black money;
3. Provide a virtual money wallet address for "score running" or transfer.

The key point of this crime lies in the "assistance" behavior that directly facilitates information network crimes, without the need to aim for profit as the ultimate goal.

(2) Typical Application Scenarios of Concealment Crimes

Concealment of crime is more focused on assisting upstream criminals in handling "proceeds of crime", specifically manifested in the fact that the actor knows that it is criminally obtained or its proceeds, yet still assists in the transfer, acquisition, custody, exchange, etc. Common manifestations include:

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

Concealing crime 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 boundaries of the application of the two crimes lie in the stage at which the act occurs, the object 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; one cannot simply apply the offense names. The following three aspects are crucial:

(1) The objects of subjective knowledge are different.

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

2. Concealment Crime: The actor must have knowledge that "the property handled is proceeds of crime." That is: it is not necessary to know the specific details of the original criminal act, only to know that "the property or Virtual Money 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 points of the behavior occurrence are different.

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

For example, helping a scammer to set up a virtual money wallet and participate in fund transfers 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 holding or selling, the other party may then be guilty of concealment.

(3) Whether it constitutes an accomplished crime

Concealment behavior often has a strong causal relationship with criminal outcomes; for example, without running point transfers, the funds of fraud gangs cannot be disposed of. Although the crime of assisting in a crime also involves helping upstream crimes to "realize profits," it does not determine whether the upstream crime can be established.

For defense lawyers, 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 obtained the coin, whether the communication records mention upstream crimes, and whether there is an intention to "clean" the coin's flow.

Second, on the subjective level: if the defendant truly did not know that the upstream behavior was criminal, only knowing that "this coin is not clean", it should be considered to apply the crime of aiding and abetting, advocating for a "minor offense" treatment.

4. Conclusion

Under the technical support of high anonymity, ease of cross-border transactions, and decentralization of virtual money, the difficulty of applying criminal law has significantly increased, and the boundaries between aiding and concealing crimes are becoming increasingly blurred. However, precisely in this blurred boundary, 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 concerns the restraint of the law and the realization of justice. From the standpoint of personal rights protection, the ability to accurately distinguish between aiding 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 surrounding 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.