"动动手指就能赚钱！" "帮忙取个钱就有好处费！" "这样的好事可是天上掉馅饼，确定不尝试一下吗？"在日常生活中，你是否抵挡得住这样的"诱惑"？但 是，你可不要以为这只是一个简简单单的"小忙"而已。这不，隔壁村的王一（化名）因贪图利益，看到 网上"跑分"赚钱的信息，十分心动，想着不过是帮忙转转账、取取钱，既轻松又来钱快，结果一头栽进 了违法犯罪的深渊…… 实际上，王一所谓的"跑分"就是帮助上线将网络赌博、电信诈骗等资金领取并转移。为了赚取所谓 的"跑分"佣金，王一与"上线"取得联系，开始按照指示操作。 他首先联系小A、小B、小C将三人的银行卡号码提供给上线用以转移网络赌博、电信诈骗的违法所 得，上述三人就成了他们口中的"卡农"。等"卡农"银行卡收到违法资金后，王一再将"卡农"们带往银行 取现，并将钱收集齐交给其上线。 王一不仅自己贪图利益参与其中，还在取现的时候联系李二（化名）帮忙开车，顺便看守"卡农"，防 止"卡农"带钱跑路。而李二明知王一等人所取的现金系违法犯罪资金的情况下，仍开车带人去银行取 现，方便王一将钱转给上线。 一次两次，三次四次，王一和李二明知是犯罪所得而予以转移，其行为均已触犯《中华人民共和 ...

（来源：法治日报） □ 本报记者 邢东伟 翟小功 "帮忙拉人进群就有钱拿""借用一下银行卡而已，没事的"……看似简单的"高 薪工作"，其实是诈骗团伙精心设计的陷阱。近日，海南省洋浦经济开发区人民法院开庭审理一起掩 饰、隐瞒犯罪所得罪案件并当庭宣判。 法院查明，2025年6月，被告人钱某在被拉入名为"精准扶贫专 项资金对接打款"的聊天群后，在该群中结识了周某。聊天期间，周某让其提供银行卡供转账使用，并 承诺钱某每拉一人进群并提供银行卡就可获得红包2000元。 钱某有犯罪前科，其银行卡无法使用，可 仍想赚取2000元钱。她与王某聊天过程中，向其介绍了在网上注册领取扶贫资金一事，王某按照钱某的 操作，用手机下载软件并加入群聊，按照指示在群内签到。一段时间后，周某联系王某，称只要提供银 行卡协助转账事宜，就给一定"好处费"，王某答应了。 2025年8月，被害人杨某受某网友"知道交易内 幕，购买黄金期货赚钱"的宣传引诱，在其推荐的网站上购买了10万元的黄金期货，后发现钱无法取 出。原来，该网站并非真实的官方网站。这笔诈骗款辗转进入了王某的银行账户中，随后钱某监督王某 将10万元赃款取出，并存入周某的指定银行账户中。 被 ...

Core Points - The case involves a defendant, Ke, who was sentenced to 18 months in prison for concealing and disguising criminal proceeds related to a fraud case, with the sentence combined to a total of 2 years due to prior probation violations [1] - The investigation revealed that Ke exchanged cash for U-Currency (a virtual currency pegged to the US dollar) in a suspicious manner, indicating knowledge of the illicit nature of the funds [2] - Key evidence included a video showing large stacks of cash, which was linked to the victim's bank withdrawal records, confirming the source of the funds as fraudulent [2][3] Group 1 - Ke was found guilty of concealing criminal proceeds and was sentenced to 2 years in prison after a previous probation was revoked [1] - The investigation utilized video evidence to trace the cash back to the victim, establishing a direct link to the fraudulent activity [2] - The choice of location and timing for the cash exchange raised suspicions about Ke's awareness of the criminal nature of the funds [2] Group 2 - The court accepted the prosecution's evidence and sentencing recommendations, leading to a conviction that was upheld [3] - Ke initially denied involvement but ultimately confessed in court after the evidence was presented [3]

Core Viewpoint - A significant bribery case involving a senior executive of a large chain supermarket in Shanghai has been uncovered, revealing a scheme where the executive solicited substantial "loans" from suppliers, amounting to over 7 million yuan, disguised as friendly financial transactions [1][2]. Group 1: Case Details - The investigation began after numerous anonymous complaints targeted the supermarket's East China operations head, who was found to have intervened in bidding processes for personal gain [1]. - The executive, identified as Guan, requested over 3 million yuan from a logistics supplier during a critical contract renewal period, without any formal loan agreements, which indicated a clear violation of normal lending practices [1]. - Guan's actions were characterized as a form of "buying road money" to secure business opportunities, as he promised continued business in exchange for the funds [1]. Group 2: Background and Methodology - Prior to his promotion, Guan had established a relationship with the supplier, who initially used gifts to gain favor, which escalated into blatant bribery over time [1]. - The investigation revealed that Guan regularly solicited funds under various pretexts, accumulating a total of over 7 million yuan from the supplier by the time of the case's exposure [1][2]. Group 3: Legal Consequences - Guan has been arrested for accepting bribes, while the supplier has been charged with bribing a non-state worker, and an accomplice has been implicated for concealing the illicit funds [2]. - Authorities emphasized that such internal corruption not only harms corporate interests but also undermines fair market competition, urging companies to strengthen internal controls to combat corruption [2].

Core Viewpoint - The Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate have jointly issued a legal interpretation aimed at more precisely combating downstream crimes related to telecommunications and online fraud, effective from August 26, 2023 [1]. Group 1: Legal Interpretation Details - The interpretation consists of 12 articles that address the crime of concealing and disguising criminal proceeds, which is closely linked to telecommunications fraud and online gambling [1]. - The crime of concealing and disguising criminal proceeds has seen a shift in its primary associated crime from theft to fraud, particularly telecommunications fraud [1]. - The interpretation emphasizes strict legal standards for determining "knowledge of criminal proceeds," aiming to prevent the over-expansion of criminal liability [1]. Group 2: Criteria for Judging Social Harm - The interpretation outlines that the social harm of the crime should be assessed based on upstream and downstream relationships, subjective malice, methods of conduct, amounts involved, and criminal consequences [2]. - It allows for the prosecution of smaller amounts of concealing and disguising criminal proceeds if they are closely related to upstream crimes and have severe consequences [2]. - Conversely, larger amounts that are loosely connected to upstream crimes may not be prosecuted or may receive leniency [2]. Group 3: Penalty Standards - The interpretation optimizes the standards for aggravated penalties, distinguishing between serious crimes like illegal mining and other offenses, with specific monetary thresholds set at 5 million and 500,000 yuan respectively [2]. - A new provision encourages cooperation with judicial authorities in tracing upstream crimes, allowing for reduced penalties for those who assist in recovering losses [2].

Group 1 - A recent case in Beijing highlights the legal consequences of using virtual currencies to conceal and transfer criminal proceeds, with a defendant sentenced to three and a half years in prison for assisting in the transfer of 200,000 RMB in fraudulently obtained funds [1] - The court found that the defendant, Liu, knowingly sold USDT to an individual aware that the cash involved was criminal proceeds, which led to the conviction for the crime of concealing and disguising criminal proceeds [1] - The ruling emphasized that the total value of concealed criminal proceeds exceeding 100,000 RMB qualifies as "serious circumstances," resulting in Liu's sentence and a fine of 40,000 RMB [1] Group 2 - Judges noted that such crimes are characterized by a profit-driven mentality and a false sense of security, as criminals often underestimate the legal repercussions of their actions [2] - The judiciary warns the public to be cautious of unusual virtual currency transactions that deviate from market prices, involve rapid large transactions, or employ covert operations, as these may indicate illicit activities [2] - Individuals knowingly assisting in the conversion or transfer of criminal proceeds may face severe criminal penalties under Chinese law, specifically Article 312 of the Criminal Law [2]

Group 1 - The case highlights the risks associated with large transactions in the gold industry, particularly regarding money laundering and the concealment of criminal proceeds [1][6] - The jewelry store owner, despite being warned about suspicious customer behavior, continued to facilitate transactions, ultimately leading to legal consequences [2][4] - The case serves as a warning to other businesses in the gold sector to adhere to anti-money laundering regulations and to be vigilant in identifying potentially illicit transactions [4][6] Group 2 - The legal framework under which the store owner was prosecuted emphasizes the seriousness of knowingly facilitating transactions involving criminal proceeds [6] - The increasing trend of criminals using gold purchases to launder money underscores the need for stricter compliance measures within the industry [6] - The case illustrates the importance of understanding legal obligations and the potential repercussions of neglecting due diligence in financial transactions [6]

Core Viewpoint - The Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate have released typical cases to clarify the legal issues surrounding the concealment and disguise of criminal proceeds, particularly in the context of virtual currencies and large gold transactions [1][2] Group 1: Criminal Methods - Criminals are increasingly using virtual currencies and large gold transactions to conceal the origins and nature of illicit funds, leveraging blockchain technology and virtual spaces for rapid fund transfers [1] - In a specific case, defendants used a network trading platform to convert criminal proceeds into virtual currency, facilitating quick transfers to evade law enforcement [1] - The use of large gold transactions for concealing criminal proceeds has become a common method across various regions, as demonstrated in a case where a defendant knowingly assisted in such transactions [1] Group 2: Legal Proceedings and Judgments - In a case involving the purchase of stolen steel plates, the defendant was sentenced to six years in prison for knowingly acquiring goods of unknown origin at significantly below market value, resulting in illegal profits exceeding 6 million yuan [2] - The distinction between aiding information network crimes and the concealment of criminal proceeds has posed challenges in judicial proceedings, necessitating careful consideration of the defendant's knowledge and actions [2] - The release of these typical cases aims to enhance the effectiveness of handling criminal cases related to the concealment of criminal proceeds, ensuring proper application of the law [2]

Core Viewpoint - The Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate jointly released an interpretation regarding the handling of criminal cases related to concealing and disguising criminal proceeds, effective from August 26, 2025, aiming to clarify judicial rules and unify legal application [1]. Group 1: Legal Framework and Context - The crime of concealing and disguising criminal proceeds is the most prevalent type of money laundering crime, closely linked to telecom fraud and online gambling [1]. - From 2020 to 2024, prosecutors initiated 230,200 cases of this crime, while courts concluded 220,900 first-instance cases, effectively deterring upstream crimes such as telecom fraud and online gambling [1]. Group 2: New Challenges and Legal Adaptations - The evolving nature of crime, including more sophisticated methods and the shift from theft to fraud, particularly telecom fraud, presents new challenges for legal application [2]. - The interpretation clarifies that any actions that conceal or disguise criminal proceeds, such as transferring funds or converting assets, fall under the scope of the law [2]. Group 3: Standards for Criminal Liability - The interpretation emphasizes strict adherence to the requirement of "knowing the proceeds are criminal" and modifies the standards for determining this knowledge to prevent overreach in criminal prosecution [3]. - A comprehensive assessment of social harm will be used to determine criminal liability, considering factors such as the relationship to upstream crimes, subjective malice, methods used, amounts involved, and consequences [3]. Group 4: Penalty Guidelines - The interpretation introduces differentiated standards for severe cases based on the type of upstream crime, setting thresholds of 5 million and 500,000 yuan for aggravated penalties [3]. - It also includes provisions for leniency in sentencing for individuals who significantly assist in tracing upstream crimes, encouraging cooperation in recovering losses [4].

Core Viewpoint - The Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate jointly released an interpretation regarding the handling of criminal cases related to concealing and disguising criminal proceeds, effective from August 26, 2025, aiming to clarify judicial rules and unify legal application [1]. Group 1: Legal Framework and Context - The crime of concealing and disguising criminal proceeds is the most prevalent type of money laundering crime, closely linked to telecom fraud and online gambling [1]. - From 2020 to 2024, prosecutors initiated 230,200 cases of this crime, while courts concluded 220,900 first-instance cases, effectively deterring upstream crimes such as telecom fraud and online gambling [1]. Group 2: New Challenges and Legal Adaptations - The evolving nature of crime, including more sophisticated methods and organized structures, has led to new challenges in applying the law regarding concealing and disguising criminal proceeds [2]. - The interpretation clarifies that the methods of crime include various actions that can conceal or disguise criminal proceeds, such as intermediary transactions, holding, using, and transferring funds [2]. Group 3: Subjective Elements and Judgement Standards - The interpretation emphasizes strict legal recognition of the subjective element of "knowing it is criminal proceeds," aiming to prevent the over-expansion of criminal liability [3]. - A comprehensive assessment standard is maintained for determining criminal liability, considering factors such as the relationship with upstream crimes, subjective malice, methods used, amount involved, and consequences [3]. Group 4: Penalty Standards and Mitigating Circumstances - The interpretation optimizes the standards for determining "serious circumstances" for increased penalties, setting thresholds of 5 million and 500,000 yuan based on the type of upstream crime [3]. - It introduces mitigating circumstances for those who significantly assist in tracing upstream crimes, encouraging cooperation in recovering losses for the public [4].