Distinction between the Crime of Assisting and the Crime of Concealment in Virtual Money Criminal Cases

With the rapid expansion of Virtual Money globally, related legal issues are becoming increasingly complex, especially in criminal justice practice. Assisting information network criminal activities (referred to as "assisting crime") and concealing or hiding criminal proceeds and profits from criminal activities (referred to as "concealment crime") are two common charges in the criminal chain of Virtual Money, but in practical application, there often exists overlap and confusion.

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

This article will deeply explore how to accurately distinguish between the crime of aiding and the crime of concealment in virtual money crimes through case analysis, legal reasoning, and practical experience, providing practical references for relevant practitioners.

1. Case Analysis

Taking the case of Chen Si and others concealing the case as judged by the Intermediate People's Court of Jiaozuo City, Henan Province as an example, the case details are as follows:

In December 2020, Li Gang and others organized Chen Si and others to transfer the criminal proceeds using bank cards. Chen Si and others provided their real-name bank cards to participate in the transfer (some were transferred after purchasing Virtual Money), and they kept accounts and reconciled through online chat groups. The three bank cards provided by Chen Si transferred a total of over 147,000 yuan in fraud funds.

In February 2021, after Li Gang and others were arrested, Chen Si and others continued to organize others to use bank cards to transfer illegal criminal proceeds, or to transfer them by purchasing 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 attorney believed it should constitute a lighter charge of aiding and abetting, but the second-instance court rejected the appeal and upheld the original verdict.

This case highlights the focal points of contention among the prosecution, defense, and court regarding the application of the crime of assisting and concealing when transferring upstream illegal gains through Virtual Money.

2. The Scope of the Application of the Aiding Crime and Concealment Crime in Virtual Money Cases

In criminal cases related to Virtual Money, the applicable boundaries of the crime of aiding and abetting and the crime of concealment are usually closely related to the role positioning of the perpetrator, the degree of subjective awareness, and the consequences of the actions. Although both crimes require the perpetrator to "know" the circumstances, there are significant differences in their applicable scenarios:

(1) Typical Application Scenarios of the Crime of Assisting in Crime

The crime of aiding and abetting 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. In the field of Virtual Money, 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 "running scores" or transfer.

The key to this crime lies in the "assistance" behavior that directly facilitates cyber crimes, without the need for the ultimate purpose of obtaining profits.

(2) Typical Application Scenarios of Concealment Crimes

Concealing crime focuses more on assisting upstream criminals in handling "ill-gotten gains", manifested by the perpetrator knowingly aiding in the transfer, acquisition, holding, exchange, etc., of criminal proceeds or their profits. Common manifestations include:

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

Concealment of crime emphasizes the act of helping to "digest stolen goods", which is closer to the traditional meaning of "money laundering"; its premise is a clear understanding of the proceeds of crime.

The boundary of application for the two crimes lies in the stage at which the act occurs, the object of subjective awareness, 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 that combines subjective mentality, objective behavior, and objective evidence of the case; it cannot simply apply the offense names. The following three aspects are crucial:

(1) The subjects of subjective knowledge are different.

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

2. Concealment of Crime: The actor must have knowledge that "the property being dealt with is proceeds of crime." It is not necessary to know the specific details of the original criminal act, but it is sufficient to know that "the property or Virtual Money being dealt with is illicit funds."

In other words, the "knowledge" in the crime of assisting in 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 a crime, serving as a "assist" role;
2. The crime of concealment usually occurs after the completion of the crime, serving the purpose of "laundering the proceeds of crime."

For example, assisting scammers in opening a virtual money wallet and participating in the transfer of funds may constitute the crime of aiding and abetting; however, if the scam has already been completed, transferring the coins to another person for holding or selling may constitute the crime of concealment.

(3) Whether it constitutes the completion of a crime

Concealment behavior often has a strong causal relationship with the outcome of the crime. For example, without running a score transfer, the funds of the fraud gang cannot be released. Although aiding and abetting crimes also involve helping upstream crimes to "cash out" the proceeds, it does not determine whether the upstream crime can be established.

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

1. Evidence level: Focus on analyzing how the actor obtained the coin, whether communication records mention upstream crimes, and whether there is an intention of "cleaning" the coin's flow.

2. Subjective aspect: If the defendant truly did not know that the upstream behavior was criminal and only knew that "this coin is not clean", it is more appropriate to consider applying the crime of aiding and abetting, arguing for a "minor offense" treatment.

4. Conclusion

With 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 the crime of aiding and the crime of concealing are becoming increasingly blurred. In this ambiguous boundary, criminal lawyers in related fields should assume 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 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 standpoint 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 coins, the legal applicability in this field will become clearer. However, before that, each differentiation of charges in criminal cases related to virtual money is a severe test of the professional ability and sense of responsibility of lawyers.