On stealing network virtual currency
According to the news on February 10, 2018, on September 4, 2017, seven ministries and commissions of the people's Republic of China issued the notice on preventing the financing risk of token issuance, which regulates the issuance of tokens. In the notice, the nature of all kinds of tokens and "virtual currency" is clearly defined: it is not issued by the monetary authority, and it has no monetary attributes such as legal compensation and mandatory, It does not have the same legal status as currency and cannot and should not be used as currency in the market. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that all kinds of "virtual currency" still have a certain property value and are part of the property of the holder. So, how to identify the nature of the theft of such tokens
In order to protect the legitimate rights and interests of "virtual token" holders, the author intends to discuss such issues through a relevant news report and relevant casesstealing bitcoin
recently, a news report said that Haidian police in Beijing cracked a case of destroying computer information system. The suspect Zhong used his administrator's authority to modify the company's computer applications and steal 100 bitcoins. Before he could sell the stolen money, Zhong was arrested by the police. At present, Zhong was detained for the crime of destroying computer information system
it can be seen from the report that the police detained the perpetrator for stealing bitcoin on suspicion of damaging the computer information system. The crime of destroying the computer information system stipulated in Article 286 of the criminal law of our country refers to the act of deleting, modifying, adding or interfering with the functions of the computer information system in violation of the provisions of the state, resulting in the abnormal operation of the computer information system and serious consequences, or deleting, modifying or interfering with the data and application programs stored, processed or transmitted in the computer information system Modifying or adding operations with serious consequences, or deliberately making or spreading destructive programs such as computer viruses, which affect the normal operation of the computer system with serious consequences
In the author's opinion, this crime is one of the crimes of impairing social management order in Chapter 6 of the criminal law, that is, the legal interest protected by this crime is actually the public order of our society, not the property interests of the digital currency holders, which in fact denies the property value of digital currency, It is only protected as a data or system function in a computer system. The author thinks that there is some irrationality in this wayfirst of all, in the notice on the prevention of bitcoin risk issued in 2013, it is mentioned that bitcoin is not a real currency because it is not issued by the monetary authority and does not have such monetary attributes as legal compensation and compulsion. Bitcoin has four main characteristics: no centralized issuers, limited amount, no geographical restrictions and anonymity. Because it belongs to a specific virtual commodity in nature The notice also clearly mentioned that bitcoin does not have the same legal status as currency and should not be used as currency in the market. However, as a virtual commodity, the property value behind bitcoin cannot be ignored
Secondly, Article 127 of the general provisions of the civil law, which came into effect on October 1 last year, stipulates that if the law has provisions on the protection of data and network virtual property, such provisions shall prevail. Although only the protection of the network virtual property has made the principle provisions, but it can not be denied that this shows our country's attitude towards the protection of the network virtual property. Although there is no special law for the protection of data and network virtual property in China, from the perspective of the general provisions of civil law, it is predicted that there will be relevant legislation in the futurefinally, from the relevant cases, we can also see the recognition of the property attribute of virtual currency such as bitcoin in China's judicial practice. In April and may 2013, Liu premeditated to set up a bitcoin trading platform, so he recruited Jin and Huang (both sentenced) to jointly set up a "bitcoin" trading platform. During this period, Liu, Huang, Jin, Jin and the defendant he, in addition to other acts of directly stealing customers' funds, also frequently cashed RMB by selling customers' bitcoins, and transferred 120 bitcoins from the website. Finally, the court convicted and punished the defendant for fraud, and the bitcoin transferred by the defendant was also included in the property loss of the victim. Therefore, from the judicial cases, we can also get the recognition of the property attributes of virtual currency such as bitcoin
based on the above reasons, the author thinks that it may be unreasonable to regulate the theft of virtual currency only as the crime of damaging computer information system. We should face up to the hidden property value and consider the application of the crime of infringing property in China's criminal law. Only in this way can we effectively protect the legitimate rights and property of digital currency holders in China
the most popular team of Dahan coin Ruide in the market
from the perspective of China's criminal law, "property" as a crime of theft is not only limited to physical property, but also intangible property, such as electricity, gas and so on. Both tangible and intangible objects have common characteristics, that is, the general public agree that they have value, and the value can be objectively measured
as for the meaning of online virtual property, the notice of the Ministry of culture and the Ministry of Commerce on strengthening the management of online game virtual currency, which was implemented on June 4, 2009, defines online game virtual currency: it is issued by online game operation enterprises, and game users use legal currency to purchase it directly or indirectly in a certain proportion, which exists outside the game program, It is a virtual exchange tool, which is stored in the server provided by online game operators in the form of electromagnetic recording and expressed in specific digital units. Online game virtual currency is used to exchange the online game services provided by the issuing enterprise within a specified scope and within a specified time. It is expressed in the form of prepaid recharge card, prepaid amount or points, but does not include the game props obtained in the game activities
from the above definition, we can see that the network virtual property has the following obvious characteristics: value specificity, a certain network virtual property can only exist in the game running on a specific server, can not be placed in other games, without a specific game, there is no value; The existence of its economic value depends on whether the players subjectively believe that it has use value and whether it can actually achieve transactions between different players in the same game; The value difference is different for different players, but it has no value for non players
from the perspective of China's criminal law, "property" as a crime of theft is not only limited to physical property, but also intangible property, such as electricity, gas and so on. But no matter they are tangible or intangible, they all have common characteristics, that is, the general public agree that they have value, and the value can be objectively measured. In contrast, the network virtual property is obviously different from the "property" in the criminal law of our country, which does not conform to the concept of public and private property in the general sense of public cognition. The legal attribute of network virtual property is actually computer information system data, a virtual exchange tool, which can not be the object of theft< In addition, according to the principle of a legally prescribed punishment for a specified crime, only those who are prescribed as crimes by law can be treated as crimes, while those who are not prescribed as objects of crimes by law cannot be treated as objects of crimes. At present, China's criminal law and previous judicial interpretations on larceny have made clear provisions on "public and private property", but the network virtual property has not been interpreted as the object of larceny
from the definition and attributes of network virtual property, the essence of the legal attribute of network virtual property is electromagnetic records, that is, electronic data. The act of stealing network virtual property is fully in line with the constitution of the crime of illegally obtaining computer information system data stipulated in article 285 of the criminal law. The application of this crime is enough to objectively and comprehensively evaluate the nature of the act< It is difficult to identify the value of network virtual property
■ judicial observation
as for how to identify the value of network virtual property, there is no unified and universally recognized calculation standard in the theoretical and judicial circles
first of all, the current judicial interpretation does not stipulate how to determine the value of network virtual property, and there is no clear basis for its determination in judicial practice, so there will be disputes in determining its value anyway; Secondly, in the objective sense, network virtual property itself has no value, and its value can only be determined when players trade, which is difficult to be identified from an objective point of view; Thirdly, the value of network virtual property can only exist in a specific server and a specific player, which is separated from a specific server and lost the so-called value. There are different values for different players, so it is difficult to have a unified calculation standard; Finally, it is not objective to identify the value according to the repair cost or expected income paid by the server operator e to theft
therefore, defining the act of stealing network virtual property as theft will bring a series of problems to the determination of the amount. In the absence of a unified and objective calculation method of the amount and the determination of the crime of illegally obtaining computer information system data, it is not appropriate to interpret network virtual property as "property" in theft
from the perspective of overseas criminal legislation and justice, it is rare to treat the theft of network virtual property as theft. The theoretical circle and judicial practice of Italian criminal law do not recognize that the act of stealing virtual property constitutes the crime of theft stipulated in Italian criminal code. It follows the principle of style interpretation and forbids to expand the interpretation of "property", including information data. As for the infringement of network virtual property, the Italian criminal code has set up a section after the traditional crime. Although there are cases in the criminal judicial practice of Japan that determine the crime of using electronic computer to defraud virtual property, it stipulates the special crime of "using electronic computer to defraud" after the traditional crime of fraud. The general theory of Japanese criminal law also believes that the fictitious property does not belong to the crime object of theft stipulated in the Japanese criminal code
in 2003, the criminal code of Taiwan deleted the provision that electromagnetic records were set as movable property in 1997, and the provisions on stealing electromagnetic records are applicable to computer crimes such as obtaining computer information system data
in conclusion, according to the special nature of network virtual property, it does not have the property attribute in the sense of criminal law. Based on the principle of legality, the theft of network virtual property can not be regarded as theft, but can be punished as the crime of illegally obtaining computer information system data.
the police detained the perpetrator for stealing bitcoin on suspicion of damaging the computer information system
the crime of destroying the computer information system stipulated in Article 286 of the criminal law of the people's Republic of China refers to the act of deleting, modifying, adding or interfering with the functions of the computer information system in violation of the state regulations, resulting in the abnormal operation of the computer information system and serious consequences, or the act of deleting, modifying, adding or interfering with the data and application programs stored, processed or transmitted in the computer information system Modifying or adding operations with serious consequences, or deliberately making or spreading destructive programs such as computer viruses, which affect the normal operation of the computer system with serious consequences
this crime is one of the crimes of impairing social management order in Chapter 6 of the criminal law, that is, the legal interests protected by this crime are actually the public order of our society, not the property interests of the digital currency holders. In fact, it denies the property value of digital currency, but only protects it as a data or system function in a computer system. The author thinks that there is some irrationality in this way
first of all, in the notice on preventing bitcoin risks issued in 2013, it is mentioned that bitcoin is not a real currency because it is not issued by the monetary authority and has no monetary attributes such as legal compensation and compulsion
bitcoin has four main characteristics: no centralized issuers, limited amount, no geographical restrictions and anonymity. Because it belongs to a specific virtual commodity in nature The notice also clearly mentioned that bitcoin does not have the same legal status as currency and should not be used as currency in the market. However, as a virtual commodity, the property value behind bitcoin cannot be ignored
secondly, Article 127 of the general provisions of the civil law, which came into effect on October 1 last year, stipulates that if the law has provisions on the protection of data and network virtual property, such provisions shall prevail
although only the protection of network virtual property has been made in principle, it can not be denied that it shows our attitude towards the protection of network virtual property. Although there is no special law for the protection of data and network virtual property in China, from the perspective of the general provisions of civil law, it is predicted that there will be relevant legislation in the future
finally, from the relevant cases, we can also see the recognition of the property attributes of virtual currencies such as bitcoin in China's judicial practice.
case 1 recently, the court of Jinjiang District of Cheng sentenced Yang Xiaolong, a "cyber thief", to eight months' imprisonment for theft. Yang Xiaolong has repeatedly stolen the virtual currency in seven online game recharge accounts of a company in Cheng, and used the virtual currency to buy game cards to sell money, making an illegal profit of more than 1300 yuan
case 2: in a previous case of QQ number theft decided by Shenzhen intermediate people's court, the prosecutor initiated a public prosecution in accordance with the crime of theft. However, the judge held that QQ number has not been regarded as a property right in China's law, so it did not support the determination of theft and sentenced the defendant to the crime of obstructing freedom of communication
in case 3, ring the two periods of September 29, 2004 and August to October, 2004, many players in the online game "Dahua Xiyou II" (Netease operation) found their equipment stolen one after another. On November 9, 2004, Netease reported the case to the Internet Supervision Department of Guangzhou Public Security Bureau, and the police arrested the suspect while concting offline transactions. On December 25, 2005, Tianhe District Court of Guangzhou city declared him guilty of theft and fined him 5000 yuan. The defendant refused and appealed. At the end of March 2006, the second instance of Guangzhou intermediate people's court decided to reject the appeal and maintain the original judgment
in case 4, from March to July 2005, the defendants Zeng and Yang sold the cracked QQ number to others. The two defendants sold more than 160 QQ numbers and got more than 70000 yuan of stolen money. On November 28, 2005, Shenzhen Nanshan procuratorate sued Zeng and Yang for theft to Shenzhen Nanshan District People's court. Nanshan District People's court held a trial on December 9, 2005, and made a judgment on January 13, 2006. The two defendants were sentenced to six months' detention for the crime of infringing freedom of communication
is virtual property protected by law
no matter Tencent q-coin or Sina u-coin, they are just data symbols used to represent certain goods or services provided by an Internet manufacturer. So far, no bank has been involved in the launch of this "network virtual currency". Because there is some competition between manufacturers, their "network virtual currency" system is often independent of each other. Therefore, "network virtual currency" can not circulate in real society like RMB. In addition, the "network virtual currency" is only a kind of delivery voucher, and almost all manufacturers that launch the "network virtual currency" do not provide the service of "network virtual currency" cashing back. The two-way or even multi-directional circulation is the basis of money being able to act as a general equivalent. The characteristic of "one-way circulation" determines that "network virtual currency" cannot act as a general equivalent. Unless we can freely and legally convert this "delivery voucher" into real cash or electronic currency. Therefore, it is only a virtual property, not a real property, and can not be the object of legal protection in China
online virtual property theft, which is characterized by stealing and selling online game accounts of major online game companies, Tencent QQ coins and game equipment, is expanding and upgrading. This not only seriously damages the legitimate rights and interests of users, but also poses a great threat to the normal operation of Internet enterprises. Therefore, the case of network virtual property theft can be classified as theft, the victim can report the situation to the public security department, but there must be two kinds of proof to file a case: one is that the victim must prove that he really owns the virtual property, the other is that there is evidence to prove that his virtual property is really stolen. If two kinds of proof are available, and the suspect is found, he can be convicted. Because, at present, the National People's Congress has not legislated on this, and this kind of case belongs to special theft, that is, this kind of crime can be punished as theft
there are mainly three views on the legal attribute of network virtual property in the theoretical and judicial circles, namely, the theory of property rights, the theory of intellectual property rights and the theory of creditor's rights. Although the network virtual property is different from the general property, but in my opinion, it is intangible property. Article 75 of China's general principles of civil law clearly stipulates that "citizens' personal property includes citizens' lawful income, houses, savings, daily necessities, cultural relics, books and materials, trees, livestock, means of proction and other lawful property that are permitted by law to be owned by citizens."“ "Other legal property" can be interpreted broadly, and network virtual property such as q-coin and virtual weapons can be classified as "other legal property" because of their basic properties. Citizen's property includes both tangible and intangible. Network virtual property should be one of intangible assets. Q-coin can be purchased directly from game developers, or obtained from the virtual currency market, so it has the property of general commodity. But whether it is creditor's rights or property rights, or intellectual property rights, this issue is the root of the current judicial and academic disputes. Virtual property is a kind of property with legal significance, which should be protected by law. As a kind of intangible property, virtual property has its own unique attributes and characteristics, which is different from the traditional tangible property and intangible property. The protection of virtual property should not be included in the category of real right or creditor's right mechanically, so it is necessary to protect it by separate legislation. The acquisition of virtual property needs to pay the corresponding time, energy and money, which has the characteristics of virtual space, tradability, value and time limit. In the network virtual space and time limit, it reflects the property value of virtual property, and shows the actual material interests in real life. It is precisely because of the transaction and value of the virtual property, as well as the paid nature of the acquisition, that the virtual property has the property nature. On the other hand, virtual property can also be possessed, used, benefited and disposed, and become the object of legal relationship. Therefore, virtual property should be protected by property law. Can theft of virtual property be punished as theft? At present, there are many kinds of currencies in the virtual market, such as Tencent Q currency, internet currency, Netease bubble currency, Sina u currency, Warcraft currency, Paradise currency, Shanda counting, etc. Take Q coin as an example, the number of users provided by Tencent is more than 200 million. Instry insiders estimate that the domestic Internet has a virtual money market scale of several billion yuan per year. Although the virtual currency market has a large scale, but the virtual currency stolen, "Filing" still has no legal basis? Virtual currency itself has no other transaction function, so it can be said that virtual currency is not a property right recognized by law. However, with the unlimited issuance of q-coin and the constant limited consumption of virtual procts, it will lead to the relative surplus of q-coin and the inflation of virtual world. At present, it is urgent to standardize the order of the virtual currency market, instead of blindly "Filing" protection, so that the public feel that the virtual currency is equivalent to RMB. When the network virtual property is stolen and cheated, we can also use the criminal law to punish criminals. At present, the court for the crime of network virtual property, some to be punished by theft, some to violate the freedom of communication to be punished. One of the reasons for different approaches is the lack of unified qualitative analysis of network virtual property. If we define the network virtual property as a kind of property, these problems can also be effectively solved. For example, some people steal virtual property or cheat for the purpose of illegal possession. If the amount of theft or fraud reaches the standard of "large amount", their behavior can be defined as theft or fraud. Of course, when the actor steals the network virtual property, his intrusion into the computer system and other means may also violate the crime of destroying the computer information system and other crimes. The combination of means and purpose constitutes an implicated crime, which can be dealt with again. What is q-coin Tencent q-coin is a virtual currency that can be paid uniformly on Tencent website. The face values of q-coin are 1 yuan, 2 yuan, 5 yuan, 10 yuan and 20 yuan respectively. For the q-coin obtained by users using the application method of dialing voice call, the expression form of 1 yuan face value q-coin is a 12 digit number string, and the expression form of 2 yuan, 5 yuan, 10 yuan and 20 yuan q-coin is a 14 digit number string starting with 2, 5, 1 and 8 respectively. The applied q-coin can purchase a series of related services on Tencent website, and input the corresponding q-coin amount according to the corresponding prompt when purchasing. At present, q-coin card can be used to apply for QQ bank number, purchase QQ beautiful number, QQ member service, QQ dating, QQ greeting card and other services. According to Tencent, a series of wonderful personalized value-added services will be launched later. Zhao Yiyong (judge of Zhengzhou high tech Instrial Development Zone, master of law): Disputes between players and thieves and between players and operators caused by the theft of virtual property. Once the virtual property is stolen, it is often difficult for users to find the thief, or it is difficult to provide evidence although they can find it. Therefore, once the virtual property is stolen, they often ask the operator for assistance and provide evidence, and most of them directly resort to the court on the ground that the operator does not fulfill its security obligations. From a technical point of view, game operators have the ability to help players save historical data and prevent data loss; From a legal point of view, game operators are also obliged to save historical data, prevent data loss and reproce game data e to charging players. Because the relationship between users and game operators is a service contract, according to the basic principles of China's "contract law", if the user's loss is caused by the game operators' failure to fulfill their ty of care, or major defects in program technology, then the game operators should bear the liability for breach of contract, including compensation for losses, restitution, and continued performance. If the game operator has no fault and the loss is caused by the infringement of a third party, it should directly claim to the infringer
legislation of virtual property protection suggests that in the absence of legislation on virtual property protection in China, network enterprises should apply the form of instry self-discipline to protect the interests of users. At the same time, we should speed up the formulation of relevant legislation or judicial interpretation. The specific measures include: (1) giving virtual property a legal status from the level of judicial interpretation 2 Add criminal legislation to protect computer data 3 Standardize the order of virtual property transactions, and ensure the security of virtual property transactions. It is suggested that the best way to deal with virtual property is through legal means
The scope of network virtual property is a new term with the development of Internet, especially online games. The crime of infringing network virtual property is the crime of infringing virtual property, The most common form is to steal network virtual property by secret means
before discussing the nature of theft of network virtual property, we should first make an accurate definition of the scope of "network virtual property" (hereinafter referred to as virtual property). Virtual property is divided into broad virtual property and narrow virtual property. Broad virtual property refers to all the exclusive data that exist in a specific network virtual space, have real transaction value or do not have transaction value and are called by the holder at any time. From the current technology development, including ID account, free and charged e-mail, QQ number, Netease bubble currency (used to buy free SMS), virtual currency, virtual equipment and so on. In a narrow sense, virtual property refers to the virtual property in online games. That is to say, it refers to the data and parameters which are stored on the server through various means, such as "treasure", "pet", "weapon", "level" and "Duan", and which are called, created or added to the game by the player at any time in the online game space environment based on the online game and recorded under the ID account controlled by the online game player
the narrow sense of virtual property only refers to the virtual property in online games, but the network virtual space is not limited to the world of online games. Therefore, we take a broad sense of virtual property in this paper. We believe that virtual property should be "virtual" rather than real property. It must exist in the virtual world and have substantial content in the virtual world, not just a substitute for the real world. Such as Dangdang, Taobao and other online shopping currency, these currencies are only an extension of the real world, it does not have the virtual property, the property does not belong to the virtual property. Another example is that the electronic funds in Internet banking are only records of real property. Even if the database recording real property collapses e to force majeure, the real property will not be damaged, and these electronic funds can not become virtual property. But for QQ and e-mail, although they are similar to the real mailbox and letters, their functions are far from comparable to the real mailbox and letters. For example, they contain network photo album, network hard disk, virtual space and so on. Therefore, we think that QQ and e-mail can become virtual property. According to the different ways of obtaining, virtual property can be divided into three categories:
the first category is the high-level account (ID) of online games or forums, QQ number with better number and e-mail. Network users can improve their level in the network community through their own continuous network community activities, so that they have a greater range of freedom and authority in the network virtual community. This kind of virtual property can be obtained free of charge from the network service providers, such as QQ number. The early five digit and six digit QQ numbers are not obtained by means of compensation, but because such resources meet the needs of network users or represent a certain high level, they are pursued by network users, resulting in the emergence of real trading behavior. Now the better QQ numbers in the nine or ten digits need to be paid from the network service providers
the second category is the virtual currency issued and sold by Internet service providers for online consumption, such as game points. This kind of virtual property generally needs to be purchased from network service providers
the third category is the "property" obtained by Internet users according to established rules when they enjoy certain network services, such as items, equipment, pets in online game settings, or other people's network virtual currency, thus becoming their own virtual property. This kind of virtual property is usually "practiced" by players in the game, and may also be purchased by network service providers or other players
Second, the nature of the act of stealing virtual property in China's judicial practice
1
There are two situations: one is stealing others' virtual property and selling it off; The other is to steal other people's virtual property for their own use. In both cases, the virtual property interacts with the real world. Stealing the victim's virtual property is essentially equivalent to stealing other people's real property. The virtual property is just the manifestation of real economic value. The virtual property has the nature of real world property. In the former case, the purpose of illegal possession is obvious, It should be regarded as theft. There are two prices in the behavior, one is the victim's purchase price, the other is the actor's selling price. How to determine the specific, the following line to explorein the latter case, the perpetrator steals other people's virtual property and does not sell it off, but keeps it for his own use. In this case, it is difficult to determine the purpose of the perpetrator's illegal possession. In our opinion, we can refer to the interpretation of the Supreme People's court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate on Several Issues concerning the specific application of law in handling theft cases (hereinafter referred to as the interpretation of theft) on December 11, 1992. According to the interpretation, those who drive a car illegally, sell or keep it for the purpose of illegal possession shall be regarded as theft. Therefore, we believe that if there is evidence to prove that the perpetrator of stealing others' virtual property is for the purpose of illegal possession, does not return it, and does not want to return it in the future, it should also be considered as theft. However, if there is no sufficient evidence to prove that the perpetrator is for the purpose of illegal possession, the perpetrator is only for entertainment purposes or other malicious purposes, such as revenge to steal other people's virtual property, this kind of behavior is only a use behavior, not for the purpose of illegal possession, generally should not be recognized as theft According to the interpretation on theft, those who drive a car for pleasure and abandon it for many times, thus seriously disturbing the work and proction order and causing serious losses, can be punished as the crime of disturbing social order; Occasionally driving a car for pleasure, if the circumstances are minor, may not be considered a crime and shall be ordered to compensate for the losses. Here, "interpretation of theft" does not identify the above two acts as theft, the reason is the same
2. Steal the virtual property which is not purchased by others with real money but has property value
for example, the five or six digit QQ number applied for free from the network service provider, or the items and equipment that players can "practice" in the game, which can be sold at a clear price on the network. There are two situations: one is to steal others' virtual property and sell it off; The other is to steal other people's virtual property and keep it by oneself. In the former act, although the virtual property is not purchased by the victim with real currency, its virtual property can be sold into real currency. The infringement of the victim's virtual property is actually equal to the infringement of his real property. Moreover, the actor who has sold the virtual property has actually made profits and illegally occupied other people's property, which should be recognized as theft
in the latter behavior, because the virtual property is not purchased by the victim with real currency, although the virtual property can be sold into real currency, the theft of other people's virtual property is for their own use, and has not been sold, so the virtual property has no interaction and meaningful connection with the real world, The nature of the property in the real world is not reflected. It belongs to the behavior in the virtual space, especially the behavior of stealing the virtual property from the network service provider. The actor can not control the virtual property completely, and the network service provider does not lose the control of the virtual property. We think that the criminal law should not intervene, It should not be regarded as theft
Third, how to determine the amount of theft of virtual property. For the case of stealing virtual property, it is the key to determine the amount of theft. For the valuation of virtual property, many people have put forward such methods: to determine by calculating the social necessary labor time; Or by the player proof, according to the player's input cost calculation; Or according to the black market transaction price to determine; Or pricing by game operators; Or replace it with the original barter; Or the establishment of a unified transfer trading platform, to transfer over a period of time to determine the average priceit is very difficult to evaluate the virtual property, and these methods are not feasible. First of all, the value of virtual property does not follow the law of value and cannot be calculated by the social necessary labor time; Secondly, according to the input cost of players, it varies from person to person. The amount of the same virtual property will vary greatly, which violates the principle of justice in the application of criminal law; Third, the black market transaction is not open and the price is changeable, so it is absurd to use the non-public and inaccurate information as the basis; Fourth, it is obviously inappropriate for operators to play the role of Price Bureau, so they have the al identities of athletes and referees; Fifthly, the tradability of virtual property is incomplete, so the valuation of "barter" or "establishing a unified transfer trading platform" is not operable
then, how to determine the amount of stolen virtual property? It can be divided into three situations:
1. For the virtual property with a certain transaction price, because the virtual property has the property of "property", its price is objective and reliable, and the amount of theft should undoubtedly be determined according to the transaction price. If stealing the virtual property secretly in the network environment constitutes the crime of theft, the amount of theft should be determined according to the amount of loss of the virtual property in real life. The corresponding amount of virtual property in real life can be determined by the actual transaction price of the virtual property in real life. The amount of theft is closely related to the property loss of the victim. After all, only the public and private property infringed by criminal acts in real life is the object to be protected by criminal law. For example, in the case of Shanghai Huangpu District People's Procuratorate suing Meng and he for cyber theft, the amount of property represented by the stolen q-coin and game point card can be calculated by using the exchange price agreed in the contract between the victim Maoli company, Tencent company and Netease company, which can accurately reflect the property losses suffered by Maoli company. At present, there is no clear stipulation on how to calculate the amount of theft of q-coin and game point card. The indictment is not calculated according to the selling price of q-coin and game point card recognized on the Internet, but according to the price actually paid by Maoli company when purchasing, which is reasonable
2. For the virtual property that has not been traded, such as the virtual property that players "practice" in the game, because the game process does not proce value, it should be paid according to the amount of profit made by the defendant after theft