In retaliation for a vegetable dealer in Chengdu, Beijing woman Yan Xia (pseudonym) fictitiously identified herself as a purchaser of a company, ordered a large number of vegetables from the dealer, and arranged for the driver Cheng Xiaofan (pseudonym) to pull the vegetables and dump them and destroy them, causing a total loss of nearly one million yuan.
Recently, the Pengzhou Municipal People's Court of Chengdu sentenced the defendants Yan Xia and Cheng Xiaofan to 5 years' imprisonment and 2 years' imprisonment and 3 years' suspended sentence respectively for the crime of intentionally damaging property; ordered them to return more than 840,000 yuan in economic losses; and confiscated the stolen property seized in the case and handed them over to the state treasury.
Gavel. Image according to Visual China
Deliberate revenge:
Woman orders large quantities of vegetables hire drivers to dump and destroy
It is understood that the victim, Master Huang, was running a vegetable wholesale business in Pengzhou City, Chengdu, and that Yan Xia, a Beijing woman, had a work intersection with him. Between October and December 2019, because of some grudges, Yan Xia, in retaliation for the other party, falsely introduced "Tan Bin" to Master Huang who was in the business of fine vegetables, and then used another mobile phone number to register a WeChat id and ordered fine vegetables from Master Huang in the name of "Tan Bin".
Master Huang believed it to be true and sent the first batch of vegetables to the warehouse designated by Yan Xia as promised.
Seeing that the vegetables in the warehouse were rotting day by day, Yan Xia contacted the driver Cheng Xiaofan through the "Cargo Lala" platform and asked him to pull the vegetables and pour them down. After that, Yan Xia was still angry, and she continued to deceive Master Huang into providing vegetables and dragged the vegetables away and dumped them for destruction.
"I saw that these vegetables were well packaged and fresh, and it was a pity that they were poured." During the period, Cheng Xiaofan pulled some vegetables to Xindu District, Pengzhou City and other places for sale.
Although Master Huang once suspected the whereabouts of the vegetables, Cheng Xiaofan explained according to Yan Xia's arrangement and used this to trick Master Huang into continuing to supply.
However, Master Huang waited left and right, and the payment for the goods was delayed, so he found the public security organ and reported the case.
It is reported that as of the time of the crime, the value of the destroyed vegetables totaled 990233 yuan.
Court Hearings:
The two were sentenced for intentional destruction of property
During the trial, the Pengzhou Municipal People's Procuratorate, the public prosecution, and the defendant's defender debated whether Cheng Xiaofan should be convicted of intentionally damaging property.
Cheng Xiaofan's defender said: Defendant Yan Xia's intention to commit a crime has exceeded Cheng Xiaofan's understanding, and neither party has a concatenation of criminal intent, so the proceeds of defendant Cheng Xiaofan should be unjust enrichment or uncaused management in civil cases.
After a public hearing by the court, it was held that the defendants Yan Xia and Cheng Xiaofan had intentionally destroyed public and private property in a huge amount, and their acts complied with the relevant provisions of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, constituting the crime of intentional destruction of property, and were joint crimes. Defendant Yan Xia is the principal offender, and although defendant Cheng Xiaofan cooperated with Yan Xia for the purpose of profit, but he helped conceal the purpose of the crime in accordance with the instructions and arrangements of the other party, and jointly committed the loss of the victim's property, it should be evaluated as an accessory to the crime of intentionally destroying property.
In light of Cheng Xiaofan's family's active compensation for the victim Master Huang's loss of 150,000 yuan and other relevant circumstances, the court sentenced defendants Yan Xia and Cheng Xiaofan to 5 years' imprisonment and 2 years' imprisonment and 3 years' probation, respectively; ordered them to return more than 840,000 yuan in economic losses; and confiscated the stolen goods seized in the case and handed them over to the state treasury.
The judge said:
Why is the driver considered an accessory?
Wang Xiaoming, the judge who undertook the case, introduced that based on her personal grudge with the victim, the defendant Yan Xia, out of revenge, took possession of the victim's property in a fictitious manner and hired defendant Cheng Xiaofan to destroy the victim's property. According to the principle of subjective and objective consistency, it should be found that defendant Yan Xia constituted the crime of intentional destruction of property.
However, if defendant Cheng Xiaofan only committed the act of intentionally destroying property and did not form a common criminal intent with Yan Xia, and his personal disposition of the victim's property for the purpose of illegal possession for profit, should defendant Cheng Xiaofan's conduct be regarded as the crime of fraud or intentional destruction of property, or does it not constitute a crime due to lack of subjective intent?
The court held that the defendant Yan Xia, in order to retaliate against the victim, falsely ordered vegetables in order to achieve the purpose of causing the reduction or loss of the victim's master Huang's property. In the process, in order to avoid the victim's suspicions, Yan Xia found the defendant Cheng Xiaofan to help him transport and process vegetables, and asked Cheng Xiaofan to lie to the victim according to his instructions that he was the driver of the company. In this process, although Cheng Xiaofan did not understand Yan Xia's true motives, in order to obtain more personal benefits, he agreed to and actually implemented Yan Xia's instructions that were untrue and beyond common sense cognition, which objectively led to a reduction in the victim's vigilance against Yan Xia's criminal intentions and a further expansion of property losses, and his behavior and defendant Yan Xia's behavior jointly caused the consequences of the victim Huang Shifu's property loss, and the defendant Cheng Xiaofan's help behavior was evaluated as an accessory, so the defendant Cheng Xiaofan was convicted of intentionally destroying property according to law. and is an accessory.
Red Star News reporter Dai Jiajia
Edited by Peng Jiang
(Download Red Star News, there are prizes for the newspaper!) ）
