The Supreme Law issued 8 typical cases of punishing evasion and resisting execution according to law.
According to WeChat official account, the Supreme People’s Court, on December 1st, the Supreme People’s Court released a number of typical cases of evading and resisting execution according to law. Since the beginning of the education and rectification of the national political and legal team, courts at all levels have resolutely implemented the decision-making arrangements of the CPC Central Committee. While carrying out in-depth centralized rectification of outstanding problems in the implementation field, they have given priority to solving the problem of "urgent difficulties and worries" of the masses and actively deployed "I do practical things for the masses" — — Efficient implementation of special actions for the people requires courts at all levels to focus on cases involving letters and visits that have been strongly reflected by the people and are difficult to solve for a long time, small-scale cases that affect people’s sense of acquisition of less than 100,000 yuan, cases involving people’s livelihood and cases involving small and micro enterprises that affect people’s happiness, etc., make full use of compulsory measures such as search, arrest, fine, detention, and investigation of refusal to execute, increase the punishment for evading and resisting execution according to law, and do their utmost and exhaust all measures to honor the legitimate rights and interests of the winning parties.
The eight typical cases released this time show the people’s court’s experience and practice of being proactive and taking measures according to the case when evading and confronting the execution behavior, and reflect the execution wisdom of the execution police who flexibly use various ways to put pressure on the executed person. The people’s court cracked down on evasion and resistance to execution, safeguarded judicial authority, guaranteed the right of the executor to win the case, played a powerful deterrent role to the executor, realized the organic unity of legal effect and social effect, and embodied the work style of executing police officers’ justice for the people and courage to take responsibility in the new era. In the next step, the national courts will take the spirit of the Sixth Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee as the guide, consolidate and deepen the achievements of team education and rectification, continue to increase the punishment for evading and resisting execution, and concentrate their efforts on settling a number of cases that are closely related to the interests of the masses, so as to achieve greater results in promoting efficient special execution actions for the people.
Typical cases of evading and resisting execution by punishing according to law
Case 1: Gong Mou et al. executed a labor dispute with a catering company in Zhuhai.
Brief introduction of the case:At the end of April, 2020, a catering company in Zhuhai terminated its labor relations with all its employees on the grounds of being affected by the epidemic, and only paid 1000 yuan’s living expenses to its employees. After the court’s decision, the company should pay wages and economic compensation totaling 2.3 million yuan to 48 employees including Gong Mou. On April 25, 2021, 48 employees including Gong Mou applied to the Xiangzhou District People’s Court of Zhuhai City, Guangdong Province for enforcement. During the execution, the People’s Court of Xiangzhou District, Zhuhai City found that the legal representative of the person subjected to execution had changed during the proceedings of the case, which was suspected of evading debts. The People’s Court of Xiangzhou District, Zhuhai City, through on-the-spot investigation, summoned Li, the general manager and Wan, the financial director of the executed person, to accept the investigation and found that Li was the main person in charge of the executed person. Later, the executive police again ordered the executed person to truthfully declare the property, but Li said that he had truthfully declared to the court and had no property to fulfill his obligations. After on-site investigation and verification by the executive police, the company under execution is not incapable of performance. Because the person subjected to execution refused to perform his obligations and did not declare his property truthfully, the court made a decision of judicial custody on 15th against Li, the main person in charge of a catering company in Zhuhai, and finally facilitated the parties to reach a settlement. On May 25, 2021, the person subjected to execution immediately paid 1.5 million yuan to the court execution payment collection account, and the remaining 800,000 yuan was paid in two months.
Typical significance:The problem of wage arrears is related to the vital interests of workers and the harmony and stability of society. The Xiangzhou District People’s Court of Zhuhai City has implemented the Regulations on the Protection of Wage Payment for Migrant Workers, taking the realization of the legitimate rights and interests of workers as an important task of "I do practical things for the masses", giving priority to the implementation and realization of wage cases involving migrant workers, making full use of investigation and disciplinary measures, and urging those who are executed to fulfill their obligation of wage arrears faster and provide stronger judicial guarantee for "protecting wages" wholeheartedly.
Case 2: Wu Mou A and others applied for enforcement of Chen Mou B’s criminal incidental civil compensation dispute case.
Brief introduction of the case:Seven first-class people in Wu Mou applied for the execution of the case of criminal incidental civil compensation for traffic accident in Chen Mou B, while seven first-class people in Wu Mou applied for the execution amount of 120,000 yuan. After Chen Mou B paid 70,000 yuan, they refused to perform the obligation of paying the remaining 50,000 yuan on the grounds of no property. At the beginning of 2021, according to the clues provided by the executor, Chen Mou B, the executor, and his wife had been engaged in poultry business in the local area for a long time. The People’s Court of Hepu County, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, the executive court raided the executor’s business premises more than 100 kilometers away, took photos of the business premises, goods, two-dimensional code of payment and other items, and then took Chen Mou B, the executor, to the nearest township to send a court for investigation, inquiry and mediation. Chen Mou B, the person subjected to execution, admitted that he and his wife made profits every month in poultry business, and because his account had been frozen by the court, he used the WeChat receipt code under his wife’s name to collect the accounts. After mediation, the executor of Wu Mou Grade A application reached a settlement agreement with Chen Mou Grade B to pay at least 2,000 yuan per month. A few months later, the application executor reported to the enforcement court that the person subjected to execution refused to continue to perform after only fulfilling the two payment obligations. After research, Hepu County Court issued an advance notice of judicial custody to Chen Mou B, who was executed, and gave him three days to fulfill all his obligations. Otherwise, he will be handed over to the public security organ for 15 days in judicial custody, and if the circumstances are serious, he will be treated as refusing to commit crimes. At the same time, Hepu County Court issued a letter to the village committee where the person subjected to execution is located about the notification that Chen Mou B has been listed as the person subjected to dishonesty according to law and assisting in urging Chen Mou B to perform the effective judgment, asking the village committee to assist in urging Chen Mou B to perform the effective judgment.And remind the village Committee to pay attention to protecting the personal information and privacy of the parties in assisting and urging. Chen Mou B took the initiative to contact the enforcement court the day after receiving judicial custody’s advance notice, and paid all the remaining money in one lump sum under the witness of the enforcement court. Hepu County Court immediately lifted all the restrictive measures taken by Chen Mou B, and sent a letter to his village committee to inform him of the completion of his automatic performance, thanking the village committee for its assistance.
Typical significance:During the execution of this case, the enforcement court timely and accurately fixed the complete chain of evidence that the executed person has the ability to perform, and even investigated him for refusing to perform. Considering that the main reason for the executed person’s refusal to perform his obligations is that he doesn’t know the law and doesn’t know the specific legal consequences of refusing to perform the effective judgment, the enforcement court explained the law to him seriously and fully, and issued legal documents to the executed person, and at the same time, with the help of the local village Committee, he gave full play to the grass-roots governance function. During the epidemic period, the Hepu County Court comprehensively applied various enforcement measures and paid attention to good faith and civilized enforcement, which not only safeguarded the legal creditor’s rights of the applicant executor, but also ensured the production and life of the executor to the maximum extent. This case was successfully executed with the minimum execution cost, which saved a lot of judicial resources and achieved the unification of legal effect and social effect.
Case 3: Yin Moujuan’s private prosecution case of refusing to execute the judgment or ruling.
Brief introduction of the case:In December 2019, the case of private lending dispute between Xu and Yin Moujuan was mediated by Yujiang District People’s Court of Yingtan City, Jiangxi Province to reach a mediation agreement and make a mediation book. Yin Moujuan had to repay Xu’s loan of 830,000 yuan and interest. However, Yin Moujuan failed to fulfill the repayment obligation in accordance with the mediation. Xu then applied to Yujiang District Court for compulsory execution. Although Yin Moujuan made many repayment promises during the execution, she failed to fulfill the deadline, and escaped from execution by fleeing from her residence. The court made a decision on judicial custody and a fine. At the beginning of 2021, Xu Mou, the executor of the application, filed a criminal private prosecution with the Yujiang District People’s Court for the crime that the executor Yin Moujuan was suspected of refusing to execute the judgment or ruling. After the criminal case was filed, the court made an arrest decision on the executed person Yin Moujuan. In April 2021, the Jiangxi Higher People’s Court, together with a number of media, launched a "yujiang county ‘ Fox hunting ’ The live broadcast of the "Arrest in Progress" exceeded 600,000 person-times, creating a strong public opinion atmosphere. After being arrested, the family of the executor Yin Moujuan reached an execution settlement agreement with the executor Xu, and the case was successfully executed.
Typical significance:This case is a typical case in which the person subjected to execution refuses to be prosecuted by means of criminal private prosecution, and the court, according to the case, through in-depth cooperation with the media, adopted new media forms such as live webcasting and full witness arrest, forming a strong deterrent atmosphere of public opinion, which has strong educational significance and social influence, and has really played a positive role in implementing a case, educating a group and influencing one group.
Case 4: Ding Mouyang and others were convicted of refusing to commit crimes for fictitious debts.
Brief introduction of the case:China Minsheng Bank v. Ding Mouyang and Pang Mouming, respectively. During the trial of the case, Ding Mouyang and others colluded with their relatives to set mortgage on their respective properties for fictitious loans before the court preserved them and notarized them. The case entered the execution procedure, and the People’s Court of Suzhou Industrial Park ruled that two properties under the names of Ding Mouyang and Pang Mouming were auctioned, and their relatives applied for priority compensation in the auction price on the grounds of mortgage. In addition, his relatives sued in different places for fictitious loans and obtained an effective judgment. He applied to the enforcement court for participation in the distribution with the judgment. Due to doubts about mortgage loan, the enforcement court explained to the executors and their relatives about false litigation’s evasion of enforcement and other legal provisions, and all parties still insisted that mortgage loan really existed and were willing to bear legal responsibilities. After the investigation by the executive court, it was confirmed that the so-called loan returned to the lender after more than 20 times of circulation, and the fact of borrowing was not established. The executive court imposed a total fine of 600,000 yuan on the two cases of fictitious debts, false mortgage and false litigation’s evasion of execution, and the judgment obtained by false litigation was also revoked by retrial. In March, 2021, Suzhou Intermediate People’s Court deployed a special campaign to crack down on refusal to commit crimes. This case realized quick move, quick investigation, quick prosecution and quick trial according to the linkage mechanism. During the transfer of prosecution, the executor Ding Mouyang and his wife completed all the debts involved. In April 2021, the People’s Court of Suzhou Industrial Park sentenced each executed person to six months’ criminal detention (suspended for six months) for refusing to execute the judgment or ruling.Penalties ranging from one year to three months in prison.
Typical significance:Since 2021, courts across the country have deployed special actions to crack down on refusal to execute crimes in light of local actual conditions, and coordinated public security, procuratorial and other units to hold special meetings, reaching consensus in advance on core issues such as case filing standards, admissibility of evidence, and whether a crime is constituted, fully condensing the joint efforts to crack down on refusal to execute crimes, giving full play to the advantages of the linkage mechanism to solve the difficulties in execution and demonstrating the determination to crack down on refusal to execute crimes.
Case 5: Li used the e-commerce platform to evade the execution case.
Brief introduction of the case:On behalf of a certain person, he applied for the execution of the dispute over the purchase and sale contract of Li. During the execution, the Nanhai District People’s Court of Foshan City, Guangdong Province failed to find Li’s executable property through traditional investigation and online inspection and control measures, so it is planned to dispose of Li, who was frozen in the litigation property preservation stage, holding 75% of the equity share of a trading company. Because the company failed to provide relevant financial books and other information, the equity evaluation could not be carried out. After an investigation by the executive court, the Internet platform and resources were fully utilized, and it was found that the trading company registered an account of "A Time Flagship Store" in Weibo, and all the information published in the account was related to children’s wear sales. The executive judge also found the online shop on Taobao and JD.COM e-commerce platforms, and confirmed that "A Time Flagship Store" was opened by the trading company as the business entity. After further inquiry, the executive judge also found that the trading company had opened another online shop named "A Flower-opening Children’s Wear Flagship Store" on Taobao. After collecting the transaction flow of two online stores from Zhejiang Tmall Network Co., Ltd., the turnover of "A Time Flagship Store" from January 1, 2017 to March 20, 2019 was 1,773,667.81 yuan, and that of "A Flower Children’s Wear Flagship Store" from January 1, 2017 to March 20, 2019 was 7,542,580.03 yuan. Accordingly, the enforcement court judged that the equity of the trading company had certain value.The person subjected to execution has the ability to perform. After being repeatedly urged and warned by the enforcement judge, the executor still ignored it. After that, the enforcement court transferred the relevant materials to the public security organs for investigation and took detention measures against the executor. The family of the executor immediately took the initiative to fulfill the corresponding obligations on behalf of Li Moumou.
Typical significance:In this case, the Nanhai District Court, on the basis of making full use of the existing property investigation measures, made full use of the Internet platform and resources, found a new way to dig deep into the property and property income hidden behind the company, and adopted the enforcement measures of transferring the case to the public security organ to investigate the crime of refusing to execute, which effectively shocked the executed person, forced him to take the initiative to fulfill his obligations, and protected the legitimate rights and interests of the winning party according to law. Nowadays, e-commerce online stores have become quite common. According to relevant data, there are more than 10 million online stores on well-known e-commerce platforms such as Taobao and JD.COM. Therefore, the court’s enforcement work can’t just stop at the investigation and control of the traditional types of property such as bank deposits, securities, real estate and vehicles under the name of the executed person, but should make full use of flexible enforcement means, make use of the Internet platform and resources, fully tap the potential clues of new types of property of the executed person, resolutely crack down on those untrustworthy executed persons who try their best to hide and transfer property and try to get away with it, and never let the Internet become a hotbed of refusing to perform the obligations of effective legal documents.
Case 6: A technology company in Shenzhen evaded execution.
Brief introduction of the case:On May 15th, 2019, under the auspices of the people’s court, the two parties reached a mediation agreement: it was confirmed that Shenzhen A Technology Co., Ltd. owed a payment of RMB 195,000 to Shenzhen A Technology Co., Ltd., and the payment owed by Shenzhen A Technology Co., Ltd. was paid to the bank account under the name of Quan Moumou, the legal representative of Shenzhen A Technology Co., Ltd. in installments. During the execution, the People’s Court of Longhua District, Shenzhen has frozen and deducted RMB 205,625 from the account of a certain B technology company in Shenzhen according to the effective conciliation statement, and plans to pay it to Shenzhen A technology company after deducting the execution fee. However, during the period of handling the payment, the enforcement court found through the related case search that there were four cases in which Shenzhen Yijia Technology Co., Ltd. was the executor, that is, the labor dispute dispute between He Mohong and the company, and the total amount of execution was 120,399 yuan. During the execution of the above cases, the court did not find that the executed person had any property available for execution, and this execution procedure was ended on May 10, 2019. After examination, Longhua District People’s Court found that during the execution of the above four cases, Shenzhen A Technology Co., Ltd. agreed to pay 195,000 yuan of accounts receivable belonging to the company to the personal account of the company’s legal representative Quan Moumou through mediation in another case, in order to achieve the purpose of transferring its property, and has actually transferred 50,000 yuan.The company’s behavior directly affected the enforcement of the above four cases and seriously damaged the legitimate rights and interests of He Mohong and other four workers. Longhua District People’s Court fined Shenzhen A Technology Co., Ltd. RMB 100,000 yuan and its legal representative Quan Moumou RMB 50,000 yuan according to law, and transferred the funds executed in the execution case of the sales contract dispute between the company and Shenzhen B Technology Co., Ltd. to the above four cases, thus protecting the legitimate rights and interests of the four workers.
Typical significance:The person executed in this case used "legal civil legal acts" as a cover to evade legal obligations, which was very concealed and deceptive. In the execution of this case, the executors made comprehensive use of information technology to make inquiries actively, found and grasped the behaviors of the executed person in transferring property and evading execution, and dealt with them in time, which not only protected the legitimate rights and interests of the workers in another case, but also took judicial punishment for refusing to execute the effective judgment and ruling of the court, and achieved good legal and social effects. This case is an effective application example of the information platform for trial execution in the implementation work, which has certain typicality.
Case 7: Han Moulong and other 10 people applied for enforcement of Huang’s private lending dispute case.
Brief introduction of the case:In the case of a private loan dispute between 10 people including Han Moulong, Chen Mou Xiang and Xu Mojin and Huang, the Shanghai Pudong New Area People’s Court ruled that Huang returned the loan principal of 3.2 million yuan and interest to 10 plaintiffs including Han Moulong, and the plaintiff gave priority to compensation for the proceeds from the discount, auction and sale of a property in Pudong New Area under the defendant’s name. During the execution, the court of Pudong New Area went to the location of the property involved to post the auction announcement and ruling and conduct on-site investigation. The mother of the executor Huang said that she could not cooperate with the move, and she was emotional and vowed to live and die with the house. In order to alleviate the antagonistic feelings of outsiders and avoid intensifying contradictions, the enforcement judge visited Huang and his mother several times to persuade them and explain their legal obligations. Because the reasoning work was invalid, on October 27, 2020, the executor Huang was arrested by judicial custody on the 15th. Since then, it still refused to move away, turned a deaf ear to the effective legal documents, and continued to hinder the court’s execution. According to the research of the Pudong New Area Court, there are many executors in this case, most of whom are elderly people over 60 years old, who are frail and sick, and some of them live on unemployment benefits. Therefore, it is decided that the Executive Board of the Pudong New Area Court will start a green channel to guide the executors to seek relief through criminal private prosecution of the executed person suspected of refusing to commit crimes. On June 24, 2021, the defendant Huang was summoned in the criminal trial. After the trial admonished and explained the risks, Huang, the executor, expressed remorse in court and was willing to cooperate with the court to enforce it. He urged the court to handle it lightly. As of September 30, 2021, the house involved has been auctioned.Enough to cover all the principal and interest of ten applicants.
Typical significance:This case is a typical successful property disposal case, involving many parties, most of whom are elderly people, and the loan is also the applicant’s pension and medical treatment money, which is a stakeholder case related to the people’s livelihood. In this case, while patiently interpreting the law, the court of Pudong New Area adopted escalating disciplinary measures against the behavior of the person subjected to execution who refused to move away and cooperate, interlocking and linking up, laying a good foundation for investigating the crime of refusing to execute, in line with the principle of proportionality and substantive justice. In this case, by opening up the start-up mode of the applicant’s private prosecution for refusing to commit crimes, the executive department guides the parties to provide evidence materials for private prosecution to investigate the criminal responsibility of the executed person for refusing to commit crimes, and then the criminal court and the executive board departments coordinate and judge the illegal circumstances of the executed person, and the criminal court conducts a systematic process of judging according to law, which has played a very good role.
Case 8: Han Moumou and others refused to execute the judgment or ruling.
Brief introduction of the case:According to the effective civil judgment made by Qingdao Intermediate People’s Court, in the case of a financial leasing contract dispute between a financial leasing company applying for enforcement and an industrial group company in Tangshan and Han Moumou, the enforced person has to pay 38 million yuan and interest to the applicant. After the person subjected to execution fails to consciously perform, the applicant applies for execution. After Qingdao Intermediate People’s Court filed a case for execution, the court found out through online investigation and control, offline visits, etc.: the executed person sold all 14 properties under his name to the employees of the company after the court sealed them up, and the executed person continued to sell products and collect payment by setting up a new company to avoid the execution of the court. Qingdao Intermediate People’s Court promptly transferred the criminal clues of refusing to execute the effective judgment in this case to the relevant public security departments for criminal responsibility. After the public security department filed the case, it took criminal detention measures against the executed person Han Moumou. Under the strong deterrent, the executed person has handed over all the cases to the court, and the case was successfully executed.
Typical significance:Because the person subjected to execution and the outsiders involved in the case refused to cooperate with the court’s execution and deliberately evaded execution, Qingdao Intermediate People’s Court made a heavy blow to this case and promptly handed it over to the public security organ to investigate its legal responsibility for refusing to perform the judgment and ruling. Faced with great deterrence, the person subjected to execution took the initiative to contact the court and the case applicant, and fulfilled all its huge debts in time, which guaranteed the legitimate rights and interests of the parties, and also reflected the situation that the judicial organs resolutely cracked down on the refusal to execute, and effectively safeguarded the dignity and judicial authority of the law.




















