CCTV News recently reported[1] a case in which a woman fell in love online with a man who claimed to work for a confidential unit. As a result, she was deceived into investing in virtual currency. The person involved has been arrested.
Author: Lawyer Shao Shiwei
0 1
Virtual currency + offline transactions” - Telecom fraud methods upgraded to version 2.0
In this case, the way the victims were defrauded is actually not new. It is consistent with the pattern of the "Myanmar pig slaughtering telecommunications fraud" that we often see in the news: criminals use online dating to first screen eligible victims online (generally women with certain economic capabilities, single or emotionally frustrated), and use emotional needs as bait to trick victims into developing emotional dependence and building trust. Through the four steps of " finding pigs - feeding pigs - raising pigs - killing pigs ", they defraud the victims of their money.
As the public security organs intensify their crackdown on telecommunications fraud and the "card-cutting operation" that has been ongoing for many years, the fraud methods of criminals have also been cracked and upgraded. Therefore, in this case, the criminals used the "virtual currency + offline transaction" method to transfer the victim's funds. Obviously, this is more covert than bank transfers. It is enough to show that the people involved in the case have strong anti-detection capabilities.
0 2
Why was U-Shang involved in the "pig killing" case?
In this case, the criminals showed the victim the investment income on the financial management platform, and the victim had already accumulated trust in the platform for a period of time, so he also had the intention to invest. At this point, the "pig-killing" link began : the criminals told the victim that this type of investment requires the use of USDT virtual currency, and that the purchase of U coins can only be done offline in cash with U merchants.
Because the victim opened an account himself (not an account controlled by the fraudster) and went to the bank to withdraw cash (not the victim transferred the money to the fraudster and the fraudster exchanged it for U coins), the victim generally did not suspect this process. Moreover, when the victim handed the cash to the U merchant, he did receive the corresponding virtual currency.
After that, after the victim transferred the virtual currency to the financial management platform, he might be able to withdraw a small amount of interest at first, but after depositing a certain amount of money, he found that the platform could not withdraw cash, and the online love partner also disappeared. So he had no choice but to call the police.
The report mentioned that "since July this year, the gang has been running more than 10 crimes in Tianjin and its surrounding provinces and cities under the banner of the so-called "U business", involving more than 500,000 yuan."
Scammers must be held criminally liable, but why are U-merchants also involved?
Although the news reports called this type of crime a "new investment scam", this type of crime has been around for some time. A U-merchant that Lawyer Shao represented a few months ago was involved in this type of case and was detained by the local police for covering up the crime.
0 3
If the victim is defrauded, does the U-merchant who conducts normal transactions with him also commit a crime?
First of all, let me say the conclusion. If the U merchant is doing a normal business of buying and selling virtual currencies to make a profit, and the money received does not involve stolen money or foreign exchange, it certainly does not constitute a crime. In this type of pig-killing fraud case, the victim's money is generally his own savings, so naturally there is no stolen money involved. So where is the problem? - There is a problem with the introducer .
How do U merchants find these customers? If you want to specialize in the business of making a profit from the price difference, it is essential to expand customer channels. TG groups are often one of the main ways for U merchants to find customers . The introducer in the TG group, or the upline, puts out the order and contacts the U merchant to say that there is a buyer who wants to buy U offline. The way U merchants and buyers trade is either to exchange money and U in person offline, or the buyer deposits cash and transfers it to the designated collection account provided by the customer service of the financial platform (this collection account is actually provided by the U merchant to the upline for selling U).
U merchants often argue that they were indeed unaware that others were defrauding victims of their money and that they were just selling Us to make a profit. Lawyer Shao has mentioned many times before that the subjective ignorance of U merchants and judicial authorities is not the same concept.
In the eyes of judicial authorities, Telegram is a communication software full of illegal crimes such as black and gray industries, telecommunications fraud, and online gambling. They have a negative impression of suspects who use this software to communicate. In the case mentioned in this article, the judicial authorities will determine that the upline that contacted U Shang on TG is likely to be in the same group as the "pig killing" team that contacted the victim.
(Telegram is a big melting pot!)
Based on this conclusion, the judicial authorities will believe that U merchants who provide U to victims have helped telecommunications fraud criminals to defraud victims of their money. Therefore, U merchants also commit a crime.
If U-Shang is involved in such a case, Lawyer Shao has previously written many articles to analyze the relevant defense ideas, so this article will not repeat them. You can click the link at the end of the article to read them.
0 4
Final Thoughts
Many U-business friends would ask Lawyer Shao how to do KYC well? However, from the case in this article, it can be seen that the money laundering crime (accomplice) of U-business has far exceeded the scope that KYC can solve.
As criminal lawyers, based on our experience in handling cases, we can say that U merchants have become the scapegoats for pig-killing scammers .
Those who have not experienced it will think that the lawyer is spreading anxiety, but those who have experienced it will know how true the analysis in this article is.
【1】 [First Time] Anti-fraud First Line Tianjin: Woman was defrauded of more than 100,000 yuan in "online dating" for "investing in virtual currency" https://tv.cctv.cn/2024/12/01/VIDEIxJCqHjAFkQeHA2wfAgL241201.shtml
