Lawyer's character

"Okay, in response to the defender's defense opinions, we mainly express the following opinions:

In this case, the appellant Yu Sanqiang used the method of selling off assets to evade debt when the loan was about to expire, with the obvious intention of illegally possessing the loan.

The accounts of the two companies under the appellant's name are not only confusing, but also have complicated payment transactions. It is impossible to clearly match the asset transfer payments received with the company's expenditures. We believe that this situation is deliberately done by the appellant in order to avoid us. Find out where the money went.

In summary, we believe that the appellant in this case transferred the collateral before the maturity of the loan for the purpose of illegally occupying the loan, and transferred the transfer money between two related companies to achieve the purpose of confusing the trial. His behavior constituted the crime of loan fraud. complete. "The prosecutor responded angrily to the defender's comments.

"The defender can respond to the prosecutor's opinions." After the presiding judge finished speaking, he looked at Fang Yi.

“Based on the prosecutor’s defense opinions and response, the defender issued the following defense opinions:

The defender believes that to determine whether the appellant Yu Sanqiang is guilty of loan fraud, we should first analyze whether the appellant has the subjective purpose of illegal possession.

The "purpose of illegal possession" belongs to the appellant's subjective psychological activities, which are often expressed through his objective behavior.

Some behaviors can directly prove that the borrower has the subjective purpose of illegal possession. For example, the perpetrator uses a false property certificate as a guarantee, obtains a loan from a financial institution, and then runs away with the money.

Some behaviors can only indirectly prove the possibility of the borrower illegally possessing the loan, but cannot directly prove the borrower's subjective purpose of illegal possession. For example, fabricating false reasons to introduce funds to obtain a loan, using false certification documents to obtain a loan, etc. In this case, other evidence is needed to prove that the borrower has the purpose of illegal possession.

According to the "Minutes of the National Court Symposium on Trial of Financial Crime Cases" issued by the Supreme People's Court, in judicial practice, when determining whether a borrower has the purpose of illegal possession, the principle of consistency between subjectivity and objectivity should be adhered to, and it is necessary to avoid relying solely on the results of losses. Objective imputation cannot rely solely on the moneylender's own confession, but should be analyzed based on the specific circumstances of the case.

According to the minutes, if a borrower illegally obtains funds through fraud, resulting in a large amount of funds that cannot be returned, and one of the following circumstances occurs, it can be determined as having the purpose of illegal possession:

1. Fraudulently defrauding a large amount of funds knowing that they have no ability to repay;

2. Escape after illegally obtaining funds;

3. Wantlessly squandering and defrauding funds;

4. Use the funds obtained through fraud to carry out illegal and criminal activities;

5. Escape, transfer funds, or conceal property to avoid returning funds;

6. Concealing or destroying accounts, or engaging in fake bankruptcy or bankruptcy to avoid returning funds;

7. Other behaviors of illegally possessing funds and refusing to return them.

Moreover, the minutes also clearly stated that when handling specific cases, if there is evidence that the borrower does not have the purpose of illegal possession, the borrower cannot be punished as a financial fraud simply because the property cannot be returned.

According to the above-mentioned minutes, the defender believes that to judge whether the borrower has the subjective purpose of illegally possessing the loan, the following three conditions must be met at the same time:

First, the borrower obtained the loan through fraudulent means;

Second, the borrower fails to repay the loan when due;

Third, the borrower knowingly does not have the ability to repay the loan or flees with the money after taking the loan, squandering the loan wantonly, escaping, transferring funds, hiding property, etc. to avoid repaying the loan.

Only when the borrower meets the above three conditions at the same time, can it be determined that the borrower has the subjective purpose of illegally possessing the loan.

In this case, the appellant Yu Sanqiang did not have any of the seven situations clearly stipulated in the minutes. He did not engage in fraud when handling the loan. Failure to repay the loan when it expired was not the result he pursued, but a normal business risk. The existing evidence cannot prove that after the loan expired, the appellant ran away with the money, squandered the loan wantonly, fled, transferred funds, and concealed property.

In summary, the defender believes that the appellant Yu Sanqiang did not have the purpose of illegally occupying the loan in this case. It does not constitute the crime of loan fraud. complete. "Fang Yi had long expected that the other party would make a fuss about illegal possession, so he focused on preparing in this aspect.

…

After nearly two hours of war of words, the trial finally ended.

Yu Sanqiang, who was sitting on the bench above, watched the defense and prosecutor exchange words. To be honest, this was the first time he had seen such a fierce court battle. Although he knew most of the "words" in what both sides said. , but what does it mean to get together, he is really a little confused.

He remembered that during the first trial, his defense lawyer Ma simply read the manuscript for less than twenty minutes and then ended it hastily, but he did not dare to be so confrontational with the prosecutor.

After the adjournment, the presiding judge pronounced the verdict that day.

"This case has been reviewed by the collegial panel and a judgment has been formed. Based on the opinions of the prosecution and defense, combined with the focus of the dispute in this case, and based on the facts and evidence of this case, this court made the following comments:

…The appellant Yu Sanqiang did not use fraudulent means at the time of the loan, but only sold the collateral during the loan repayment process. If the mortgage is legal and valid, the credit union can take legal measures to take back the collateral at any time. It will not The result is that the loan cannot be recovered.

(This meaning is very clear. Credit unions should not run around all day long. Manage your own business personnel well, implement risk control, train yourself on business knowledge, and be more careful! If it really doesn’t work, hire someone who understands it. Dharma, don’t think about getting promoted and getting rich all day long)

After Yu Sanqiang transferred the mortgage, he indeed resorted to litigation in an attempt to recover the mortgage. Therefore, Yu Sanqiang's appeal grounds that he was not guilty of loan fraud were supported. The original trial's finding that Yu Sanqiang was guilty of loan fraud was untenable. Verdict: Yu Sanqiang is not guilty. "The presiding judge's voice echoed in the courtroom, and everyone listened with bated breath.

After the verdict was pronounced, Yu Sanqiang let out a long breath, his eyes shining with excitement: Lawyer Fang was really good at squirting, and he actually got me out.

Fang Yi finally breathed a sigh of relief, humming a song and starting to clear up the case files on the table with Zhou Ying. While loading case files into the file bag, Zhou Ying secretly thought: Others really cannot understand the joy of criminal lawyers, especially the sponsoring lawyer.

Yu Sangen walked out of the court and sat in a car on the roadside waiting for his brother Yu Sanqiang. At the same time, he took out his mobile phone and dialed: "Lawyer Wan, the result of the case here is out. My brother was found not guilty. You can start the next step. Don't worry... I'll send you 1.7 million to settle the legal fees for my brother's case.

I will give you half a million yuan in legal fees for non-performing assets first, and I will pay you the rest as agreed.

Don’t worry, I will definitely sign the construction company’s legal advisory agreement with you. Any litigation arising from our company’s construction projects will be handled by your team. "