In the case of Fan v. Sichuan Technology Co., Ltd. and Li's equity dispute, the original defendant reached the following agreement under the mediation organized by the court: Sichuan Technology Co., Ltd. and Li will return 200,000 yuan to Fan before November 10, 2023. After the expiration of the performance period determined by the agreement, the person subject to enforcement still did not perform, so Fan applied to our court for compulsory enforcement. During the enforcement process, our court served the Enforcement Notice, the Property Reporting Order, the Consumption Restriction Order and other enforcement documents to the two judgment debtors in accordance with the law, but the enforcement parties ignored them and never fulfilled the obligations determined by the effective legal documents. At the same time, the court failed to find the property in the name of the person subject to enforcement through various means.
Fan told Judge Mao Na that in order to evade enforcement, the person subject to enforcement changed the collection account number, transferred the account to other accounts, and submitted to the court the service agreement signed between the person subject to enforcement and a third party, according to which the third party should pay an intermediary service fee of 250,000 yuan to a technology company in Sichuan.
8 p.m
Taurus Court Enforcement 110 call rings......
Hey, is it 'Execute 110'? I found traces of the person subject to execution, Li, and Wan Moumou, the legal representative of a technology company in Sichuan, you hurry up and send someone
After receiving the news, the executive 110 staff on duty immediately led the team to the address provided by the executor to bring Li and Wan back to the Executive Board. The presiding judge, Mao Na, also rushed back to the court as soon as she got the news.
Taurus Court Mediation Room
In the face of the enforcement judge, Li and Wan always insisted that they had no money to pay back now. When the judge asked why he changed the collection account, Wan Moumou told the judge, "I know that the court has frozen the account in the name of the company, and I am afraid that the money will not be transferred, so I changed the collection account, and now the money has not yet arrived, and after the account is received, I am ready to return the money to the applicant." In line with the principle of substantive dispute resolution, Judge Mao Na patiently organized the parties to negotiate on performance matters. However, regardless of whether the judge presents the facts or explains the law, Li and Wan Moumou "do not enter the oil and salt" and insist that there is no money to pay back now.
What's even more infuriating is that Li said to Wan Moumou in the mediation room: "We insisted that there was no money, and the court had no way to take us, and definitely wouldn't dare to detain us." Until 11 o'clock in the evening, Li and Wan's attitudes were still very tough.
Based on the refusal of Li and Wan to perform, the court decided to take compulsory measures of judicial detention against them. At the moment when they saw the detention decision, Li and Wan panicked and hurriedly said to Judge Mao Na: "Judge Mao, we know that we are wrong, we are willing to give money." But it was too late, and because of their contempt for the authority of the law and the execution of the child's play, Judge Mao Na still sent him to the detention center.
The next day, based on the applicant's understanding and the attitude of the person subject to enforcement who was willing to perform immediately, Judge Mao Na went to the detention center to interrogate Li and Wan, and Wan told the judge:
The judge told me so much, and I usually watched so many warning films about violations and crimes, but it was not as good as staying in a detention center for such a night. After this time, I really realized my ignorance, felt the seriousness and authority of the law, and from now on, I will be a down-to-earth person, do things seriously, and never violate the red line of the law.
Adhering to the concept of good faith and civilized execution, coupled with the fact that Li and Wan also deeply realized their own mistakes, the judge lifted their detention measures ahead of schedule. After Li walked out of the gate of the detention center, he also expressed his attitude to the judge:
I deeply regret my mistake and I will never do anything illegal in the future.
On the same day, Li and Wan paid 200,000 yuan to the applicant Fan on the spot, and the case was executed.
Links to legal provisions
Article 114 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that if a litigation participant or other person commits any of the following acts, the people's court may impose a fine or detention on the basis of the severity of the circumstances; where a crime is constituted, criminal responsibility is pursued in accordance with law:
(1) Fabricating or destroying important evidence, obstructing the people's court's trial of a case;
(2) Using violence, threats, or bribery to prevent witnesses from testifying, or instigating, bribing, or coercing others to give false testimony;
(3) Concealing, transferring, selling, or destroying property that has already been sealed or seized, or property that has been inventoried and ordered to be kept, or transferring property that has been frozen;
(4) Insulting, defaming, framing, beating, or retaliating against judicial personnel, litigation participants, witnesses, translators, evaluators, inquest personnel, or persons assisting in enforcement;
(5) Using violence, threats, or other methods to obstruct judicial personnel from performing their duties;
(6) Refusal to perform on a judgment or ruling of a people's court that has already taken legal effect.
People's courts may fine or detain units that exhibit any of the conduct provided for in the preceding paragraph; where a crime is constituted, criminal responsibility is pursued in accordance with law.
Article 11 of the "Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Restricting High Consumption and Related Consumption by Persons Subject to Enforcement" stipulates that the act of the person subject to enforcement violating the order to restrict consumption is an act of refusing to perform a judgment or ruling of the people's court that has already taken legal effect, and if it is verified to be true, he shall be detained and fined in accordance with the provisions of Article 111 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China; where the circumstances are serious and a crime is constituted, criminal responsibility is pursued.
Article 313 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that a person who refuses to enforce a judgment or ruling of a people's court if he has the ability to enforce it, and the circumstances are serious, shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years, short-term detention or a fine; where the circumstances are especially serious, the sentence is between three and seven years imprisonment and a concurrent fine.
Source: Chengdu Jinniu District People's Court
Late-night courier reporter on the cloud: Dong Wei
Editor: Wang Jingtao