Criminal law and criminological aspects of countering the "drops"

The subject of this study is the criminal law and criminological characteristics of the activity of so-called "drops" – intermediaries in fraudulent schemes who facilitate the movement and legalization of illegally obtained funds. The object of analysis is the social relations related to holding accountable those who are indirectly involved in committing fraud but play a key role in the realization of criminal proceeds. The author examines in detail aspects of the problem such as the evolution of methods for cashing out funds (from traditional ATM banking to the use of cryptocurrencies), gaps in the qualification of the actions of intermediaries, and the imbalance of sanctions in the current legislation. Special attention is given to a comparative legal analysis of approaches to the criminalization of drop activity in foreign jurisdictions (USA, PRC), as well as an assessment of the effectiveness of the recent amendments to Article 187 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The study utilizes comparative legal and formal-legal methods. A comparative approach is employed to explore legal regulation in the Russian Federation, USA, and PRC. The main conclusions of the conducted study include: identification of systemic gaps in the qualification of drop activities, an imbalance of sanctions between organizers and intermediaries, as well as insufficient adaptation of criminal legislation to the use of cryptocurrencies in fraudulent schemes. The novelty of the research lies in a comprehensive analysis of the phenomenon of "dropping" not only as a criminal law issue but also as a socio-economic phenomenon that has undergone historical evolution from ATM fraud to cryptocurrency operations. The author’s significant contribution consists of developing a concept for differentiating liability, as well as proposing mechanisms for implementing foreign experience while considering the features of the continental legal system. The necessity of adopting clarifications from the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation for the unification of judicial practice and adjustment of sanctions for mediation in fraud has been demonstrated to ensure compliance with the principle of proportionality of punishment.