Lawyer

Chapter 415
Five years ago, Mr. Li of the local Red Sun Advertising Company borrowed 100 million yuan from Mr. Meng’s brother Wang Liang because he was in urgent need of capital turnover. The two parties agreed on a monthly interest (simple interest) of three cents. 1306 million yuan.

The loan agreement reads: "Red Sun Advertising Co., Ltd. today borrowed [-] yuan in cash from Wang Liang for the company's operating turnover. Return within one month without interest. Borrower Red Sun Advertising Company, joint liability guarantor Li Changshun".

After that, Li Changshun of Red Sun Advertising Company repaid all the principal and interest of the loan on schedule, but he forgot to ask Wang Liang for the IOU.

At the beginning of last year, Wang Liang found the original loan agreement of Red Sun Advertising Company when he was packing the safe, so he took the loan agreement to the court in a brainstorming, sued Red Sun Advertising Company and Li Changshun, and demanded that Red Sun Advertising Company The company repaid the loan of 1306 million yuan and the interest on the delayed repayment, and Li Changshun assumed the joint guarantee responsibility.

Later, the court heard the case, and Red Sun Advertising Company naturally did not accept Wang Liang's appeal, and argued that it had repaid all the loan, and that the statute of limitations for the loan had expired, so it did not agree to mediation.

Subsequently, the people's court issued a civil judgment, rejecting Wang Liang's claim on the grounds that the loan had exceeded the statute of limitations.

After receiving the verdict, Wang Liang consulted his lawyer. The lawyer said that if there are witnesses who can prove that he had asked Red Sun Company or Li Changshun for the loan within two years from the date the loan was due (the previous limitation of action was two years, the Civil Law After the promulgation of the Code, the statute of limitations is three years), which will lead to the interruption of the statute of limitations, so as to recalculate the statute of limitations, and so on, the statute of limitations will be no problem.

Later, when paying the consulting fee, the lawyer saw that Wang Liang was generous, and specifically reminded him that the person who had better follow him to collect money had no immediate family relationship with him, and had no interest in it.

After Wang Liang's consultation and clarification, he was determined to file an appeal to the Intermediate People's Court.During this period, he got two friends Niu Tianlai and Zhao Peng to testify to him, proving that they followed Wang Liang to the Red Sun Advertising Company many times to collect debts from Li Changshun, and issued false testimony.

During the trial of the second instance, his two friends Niu Tianlai and Zhao Peng really "lived up to their trust" and testified in court respectively, and their words fit perfectly.

When the second trial was held, Li Changshun from Red Sun Advertising Company was so angry that he could not speak, and Wang Liang sat on the appellant's bench elated.

Later, after mediation by the judge, Red Sun Advertising Company finally agreed to pay Wang Liang [-] yuan to settle the case, and the court issued a civil mediation statement on the same day.

The matter should have ended at this point, but it is not as good as the sky. Less than three months after Wang Liang received the [-] yuan transferred from Li Changshun, he received another summons from the public security department.

It turned out that his friend Niu Tianlai was arrested by the police for participating in opening a casino. During the interrogation, in order to make meritorious deeds and reduce his sentence, he told about Wang Liang's false lawsuit.The police did not expect to have unexpected gains, and immediately summoned Wang Liang.

In the face of Niu Tianlai's testimony, Wang Liang had no choice but to confess truthfully, confessing that he collaborated with Niu Tianlai and Zhao Peng in the false lawsuit.Afterwards, the case was transferred to the procuratorate, and after review by the procuratorate, the case file was transferred to the court for prosecution.

The court of first instance held that Wang Liang instigated others to give false testimony, which violated the normal judicial order, and his behavior constituted the crime of obstructing testimony; Zhao Peng, the defendant, was instructed by Wang Liang to help him provide false testimony in court, which violated the normal judicial order. The circumstances are serious, and his behavior constitutes the crime of helping to falsify evidence.

Niu Tianlai is involved in the case of opening a casino, so it is handled separately.

Finally, in accordance with the first and second paragraphs of Article [-] of the "Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China", the court ruled: [-]. The defendant Wang Liang committed the crime of obstructing testimony and was sentenced to one year and six months in prison; [-]. The defendant, Zhao Peng, committed the crime of helping to falsify evidence and was sentenced to one year in prison.

After the verdict was pronounced in the first instance, both Wang Liang and Zhao Peng refused to accept it, and planned to appeal on the grounds that the original verdict found the facts unclear and the law was wrongly applied.Mr. Meng and Wang Liang have a good relationship. Zhao Peng is the person in charge of Mr. Meng's local branch, so he wants to give them a hand and consult with a lawyer to see if there is a chance to reverse the case.

"The case you mentioned is very similar to a case I did before.

Of course, I have neither seen the case file nor met the defendant. If what you say is true, your friend Wang Liang basically has little chance of overturning the case. He ordered others to give false testimony, and there is Niu Tianlai’s statement and the second-instance civil mediation agreement. Now, I personally think that there is no problem in the fact finding of the criminal case, and there is no major problem in the sentencing, and the judge has discretion... So there is a high probability that the case will be rejected by the court of second instance and the original judgment will be upheld.

Of course, it cannot be ruled out that the lawyers currently defending Wang Liang are of a higher level than me and know the facts of the case better, so they might be able to find a breakthrough. "Fang Yi said.

"What about Zhao Peng? He just testified in court, he didn't get any benefits, and he will be sentenced to one year in prison? Can his testimony be used as criminal evidence?
The lawyer told me that Zhao Peng’s testimony in court in the civil lawsuit does not belong to the “evidence” in the crime of aiding in the falsification of evidence, and his behavior is not yet at the level of “serious circumstances”, so it should not be identified as Aiding in falsification of evidence. "Mr. Meng said.

His idea is very simple, two people, no matter which one they are, if they can fish out one is one.

"In my opinion, Zhao Peng deliberately gave false testimony in court in the civil lawsuit, which seriously disrupted the normal judicial order and caused the Red Sun Advertising Company to suffer actual property losses. The social harm was relatively large. Zhao Peng did constitute the crime of helping to forge evidence." Fang Yi thought for a while.

"Well, later I consulted a college classmate who is a lawyer. He told me that in the crime of helping to forge evidence, the perpetrators should destroy or forge evidence, which should be limited to physical evidence, documentary evidence, appraisal conclusions, inspections, inspection records, and audio-visual materials. Etc. He said that it must be "materialized" evidence, and non-materialized evidence does not belong to the category of evidence for this crime.

Lawyer Fang, don’t laugh at me. I understand that the objectification he said must have something that can be seen and touched. Words have no basis and cannot be used as evidence of a crime.

I don't know if I understand it right. Mr. Meng looked at Fang Yi seriously.

Fang Yi smiled and said to himself: You are asking me to comment on the opinions of my peers in disguise. Isn't this spreading hatred?I don't do offending work.Besides, what qualifications do I have to comment on other people's opinions, I am not an "expert" who is messy all day long.But people asked this way, so they don't comment, but they can explain their views.

(End of this chapter)