站内查询
您现在的位置是:主页 > 美高梅官方网站app下载 > 男子有償搶票獲刑同樣加價搶票的平臺為何沒事搶票軟件
男子有償搶票獲刑同樣加價搶票的平臺為何沒事搶票軟件
2020-01-06 23:33  www.taobaomir.com

  核心提示:對購票者來說,無論通過個人還是網絡平臺搶票,都有“中間商”賺差價。那么,為何個人以違法甚至犯罪論處,而網絡平臺卻幾乎沒作違法處理?對此專家認為,法律上應當對個人以及第三方購票平臺的行為,有明確統一的認定標準。

Core tip: for ticket buyers, whether through the individual or the network platform to grab tickets, there are \"middlemen\" to earn the difference. Why, then, is the individual punished for breaking the law or even committing a crime, while the network platform has hardly done so? The experts believe that the law should have clear and uniform standards for the behavior of individuals and third-party ticket-buying platforms.

  2017年,原本想回鄉創業的他,看到第三方購票平臺能替人搶票,便在老家做起這門生意,但其不具備訂票營業資格。

In 2017, he originally wanted to go home to start a business, saw that the third-party ticket platform can get tickets for people to start the business in his hometown, but it does not have the qualifications to book tickets.

  于是,劉金福利用搶票軟件,在12306網站上訂購火車票,以每張50到200元的加價倒賣給購票人,非法獲利31萬余元,涉案火車票票面額123萬多元。

As a result, Liu Jinfu used ticket snatching software to order train tickets on the 12306 website, with each 50 to 200 yuan to resell to ticket buyers, illegal profits of more than 310,000 yuan, the value of train tickets involved in more than 1.23 million yuan.

  劉金福很委屈。他說:“我也不知道網絡代搶是否屬于倒賣火車票,但是我覺得大公司也在做,因為用戶可以找我搶,也可以找第三方平臺搶,我并沒有強迫他們的行為。”

Liu Jinfu is very aggrieved. \"I don't know if it's part of selling train tickets, but I think big companies are doing it, because users can find me, or third-party platforms, and I don't force them to do it,\" he said.

  事實上,對購票者來說,無論通過個人還是平臺搶票,都有“中間商”賺差價。那么,為何個人常遭司法對待,平臺卻幾乎沒作犯罪處理呢?

In fact, for ticket buyers, whether through the individual or platform to grab tickets, there are \"middlemen\" to earn the difference. Why, then, are individuals often treated with justice, and the platform is hardly criminal?

  2017年7月,劉金福以1500至4500元不等的價格在網上購買搶票軟件,以30元/萬個的價格購買“打碼”,以2740元的價格購買了12306網站實名注冊賬號935個,用于在12306網站上進行搶票操作。

In July 2017, Liu Jinfu bought online ticket snatching software for 1500 to 4500 yuan,\" coded \"for 30 yuan\/10,000, and 935 registered accounts of 12306 website real name for 2740 yuan for ticket snatching operation on 12306 website.

  此外,劉金福還購買了兩部手機,用于接單和打廣告。搶票成功后,他根據所搶購火車票的車次、乘車時段及運行到達車站等不同情況,向購票人分別收取50元到200元不等的傭金。

In addition, Liu Jinfu also bought two mobile phones for receiving orders and advertising. After winning the ticket, he charged the buyer a commission of 50 yuan to 200 yuan according to the number of train tickets he had purchased, the time of the trip and the number of trips to the station.

  利用這種手段,從2018年4月至2019年2月,劉金福先后倒賣火車票3749張。據介紹,他代購時,首先必須獲得其他旅客身份信息,之后再登錄他人12306,以一名普通旅客身份去和其他人展開刷屏競爭,最終買到車票。

Using this method, from April 2018 to February 2019, Liu Jinfu has sold 3749 train tickets. When he buys, he must first obtain other passenger identity information, and then log on to another 12306, as an ordinary passenger to compete with others, and eventually buy tickets.

  2019年9月10日,劉金福的案件在南昌鐵路運輸法院一審開庭。法院認定劉金福犯倒賣車票罪,判處有期徒刑1年6個月,并處罰金124萬元。

On September 10,2019, Liu Jinfu's case was heard at the Nanchang Railway Transport Court for first instance. The court found Liu Jinfu guilty of selling tickets and sentenced him to one year and six months'imprisonment and a fine of $1.24 million.

  不服判決的劉金福上訴,兩名律師做無罪辯護。理由是,劉金福收取的是服務費,不是對車票的加價,且沒控制票源。

Liu Jinfu appealed against the verdict, and two lawyers pleaded not guilty. The reason is that mr liu charges a service charge, not a fare increase, and does not control the ticket source.

  在律師看來,一審法院判決適用法律錯誤,劉金福利用軟件代理客戶購票,系民事代理法律行為,車票所有權自始至終屬于委托人,沒有發生轉移,不存在倒賣行為和倒賣可能,不構成倒賣車票罪。

In the view of lawyers, the court of first instance ruled that the application of the law error, liu jinfu use software to buy tickets for customers, is a civil agency legal act, ticket ownership from beginning to end belong to the client, no transfer, there is no reselling behavior and reselling possible, do not constitute the crime of reselling tickets.

  從一審到二審,劉金福對事實部分認定沒有異議。但對在實名制購票的背景下,自己的行為到底是否構成刑事犯罪存在不同意見。

From the first instance to the second instance, Liu Jinfu has no objection to the fact part. However, there are different opinions on whether their behavior constitutes a criminal offence under the background of real name system.

  庭審時,檢方舉例說,劉金福在2019年春節期間,將9元一張的車票加價120元售賣給他人。所以,他們要求維持原判。

During the trial, prosecutors gave an example of Liu Jinfu selling a nine-yuan-a-ticket ticket at a premium of 120 yuan to others during the Spring Festival in 2019. Therefore, they demanded that the sentence be upheld.

  劉金福的律師解釋說,他自始至終沒取得火車票所有權,不符合先買后賣的倒賣火車票含