가상자산 신종범죄 유형론 고찰 및 규율 공백에 관한 정책입법 제언

One of the ways to effectively achieve criminal policy objectives in areas of uncertainty might be clearly categorizing the areas to be implemented. As Virtual Assets facilitated crimes are emerging, there have been cases where they are included within the framework of the existing crime type and are difficult to do so in parallel. For the purpose of criminal justice from a law enforcement perspective, this paper intended to classify cryptocurrency related crimes into three types: ① virtual assets 'abuse' crimes, ② virtual assets 'market' crimes, and ③ virtual assets 'infringement' crimes. As a first type, abuse crimes are mainly cases in which virtual assets are used in the money laundering process, and are mainly types of crimes related to the predicate offence of money laundering. The second type of 'market' crime is a type of unfair trade that recognizes this marketability and appears here whilst a market for buying and selling virtual assets has been established. Third, 'infringement' crimes are cybercrime, such as cyberattacks on virtual assets service providers. This classification is based on the recent revision of the ‘Act on reporting and using specified financial transaction information’(Specific Financial Information Act) and the recent enactment of the ‘Virtual Assets Customers Protection Act (Virtual Asset Protection Act) in Korea. Type 1 was extracted from the former focused on anti-money laundering, Type 2 was classified from the latter, which regulates marketability and unfair trade, and cybercrime was independently classified. Legislative and law enforcement blind spots that arise amid the rapid spread of the use of virtual assets and misuse as a means of moving criminal funds were added and legislative suggestions above were presented to clarify penalty activities under the principle of legality(nulla poena sine lege).