Cryptocurrency Turnover as an Object of Crime and Doctrinal Errors in its Perception

Cryptocurrency and the problems of its legal regulation have recently become the subject of numerous studies. Legal science, including criminal law, does not stand aside. The contradictory nature of the legal nature of cryptocurrencies, the inability to accurately determine their species affiliation, a fairly large number of questions from the law enforcer led to an extensive doctrinal discussion. In author’s opinion, one of the most urgent questions is the definition of cryptocurrency relations as an object of crime and how errors in the perception of these relations and, most importantly, their subject matter, affect the enforcement and subsequent qualification of crimes. The paper discusses in detail the main points of view on the essence of cryptocurrency, the position of scientists on this issue. The author explains why cryptocurrency cannot be attributed to the types of securities, currencies or currency values known to  modern law, and offers her own approach to the definition of cryptocurrency and cryptocurrency relations, and indicates how this affects the application of the criminal law.

cryptocurrency, Bitcoin cryptocurrency turnover, cyber law, cybercrime, criminal law, digital law, digitalization, digital economy, money surrogates, cyberspace

1. Arzumanova L. L. Pravo denezhnogo obrashheniya kak podotrasl finansovogo prava Rossijskoj Federacii: dis. ... dok. yurid. nauk. — M., 2014. — 44 c.

2. Delczova T. A. Mnogoobrazie denezhnyx surrogatov v prirode, ili V chem zaklyuchaetsya svoboda vybora? // Vestnik PNIPU. Socialno-ekonomicheskie nauki. — 2017. — № 3. — S. 241—251.

3. Esakov G. A. Denezhnye surrogaty i otvetstvennost za xishhenie // Ugolovnoe pravo. — 2015. — № 1. — S. 48—53.

4. Kalinin V. N. Kriptovalyuta: opyt, sostoyanie i perspektivy // Materialy V Mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoprakticheskoj konferencii «Innovacionnyj i nauchnyj potencial XXI veka». — Saratov : Centr professionalnogo menedzhmenta «Akademiya biznesa», 2017. — S. 35—44.

5. Klistorin V., Cherkasskij V. Denezhnye surrogaty: ekonomicheskie i socialnye posledstviya // Voprosy ekonomiki. — 1997. — № 10. — S. 52—57.

6. Klokov D. V. Ob ugrozax nekontroliruemogo oborota kriptovalyutnyx instrumentov // Simvol nauki. — 2017. — № 12. — S. 52—56.

7. Korobeev A. I. Ugolovnaya politika sovremennoj Rossii: sostoyanie i perspektivy // Yuridicheskaya nauka i praktika: Vestnik Nizhegorodskoj akademii MVD Rossii. — 2016. — № 3 (35). — S. 247—250.

8. Krylov O. M. K voprosu o pravovoj kategorii «denezhnyj surrogat» // Finansovoe pravo. — 2012. — № 9. — S. 10—14.

9. Kucherov I. I. Zakonnye platezhnye sredstva: teoretiko-pravovoe issledovanie. — M., 2016. — 390 s.

10. Luncz L. A. Dengi i denezhnye obyazatelstva v grazhdanskom prave. — M. : Statut, 1999. — 350 s.

11. Maramygin M. S., Prokofeva E. N., Markova A. A. Sushhnost elektronnyx deneg, preimushhestva i nedostatki // Vestnik Omskogo universiteta. Seriya : Ekonomika. — 2016. — № 1. — S. 60—65.

12. Xaraeva D. A. Kriptovalyuta — denezhnyj surrogat ili platezh budushhego? // Effektivnost pravovogo regulirovaniya na sovremennom etape: teoreticheskie, istoricheskie i otraslevye aspekty : materialy mezhdunar. nauch. konferencii studentov, magistrantov i aspirantov. Minsk, 3—4 noyabrya 2017 g. — Minsk, 2018. — S. 116—117.