The restructuring of Wuhan GuanshengYuan was re-fermented

On August 15, 2014, this newspaper published a report entitled "Reformed but empty gloves white wolf who pushed Wuhan Guanshengyuan into the abyss?" In the process of restructuring, Han Jianqiang, the person in charge of Wuhan Guanshengyuan Food Company (hereinafter referred to as "Wuhan Guanshengyuan"), was accused of colluding with Wuhan Tiandi Group Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Tiandi Group") to sign the "Asset Sale Agreement", and the staff of relevant government departments in Jianghan District of Wuhan City illegally approved the case, resulting in the loss of state-owned assets, which caused great repercussions. After that, the reporter of this newspaper continued to follow up on this matter and learned that Tiandi Company filed a lawsuit with the Jianghan District People's Court of Wuhan City on December 28, 2014, confirming that the relevant lease contract signed by Guanshengyuan Company was invalid. In July 2015, Wuhan Guanshengyuan filed a counterclaim seeking to confirm the invalidity of the Asset Sale Agreement signed with Tiandi Company. On March 25, 2016, the Jianghan District People's Court of Wuhan City rendered a judgment rejecting Wuhan Guanshengyuan's litigation claims. The reporter compared the instructions made by the Wuhan Municipal Supervision Bureau on the "Asset Sale Agreement" in 2004 and found that the two are contrary. Unsatisfied with this judgment, Wuhan Guanshengyuan appealed to the Wuhan Intermediate People's Court on April 19, 2016.

Supervision department: Confirm the loss of state-owned assets and the invalidity of the agreement

The reporter consulted the historical documents and learned that the Wuhan Municipal Supervision Bureau had already issued instructions on the "Asset Sale Agreement" as early as 2004. Some insiders believe that the judgment made by the Jianghan District People's Court of Wuhan City means that the court directly rejected the conclusion of the Wuhan Supervision Bureau that the "Asset Sale Agreement" violated the law and that state-owned assets were lost in the process of restructuring.

A document numbered "Wu Jian [2004] No. 3" and entitled "Circular on the Handling of the Illegal Restructuring of Wuhan Guanshengyuan Food Company" made the following statement:

Han Jianqiang, the former general manager of Guanshengyuan Company, signed the Asset Sale Agreement with Tiandi Company without the collective research of the company's leadership team and the discussion and approval of the enterprise employee congress. The agreement violated the provisions of Document No. 102 and transformed Guanshengyuan Company into a simple land transfer act; When determining the land transfer price, it is not calculated according to the land assessment price, but applies the preferential policy of restructuring and determines it according to the funds required for the resettlement of employees; In addition, the ground attachment worth 7.09 million yuan was not calculated, and the area of 1.4 mu was underestimated in the process of land transfer, resulting in the loss of some state-owned assets. After signing the agreement in violation of the law, Han continued to violate Document No. 102 and relevant regulations, falsified and fabricated the agreement of the Workers' Congress, applied to the relevant departments of the municipality for the formalities of asset change, and transferred the land and real estate certificates of Guanshengyuan Company to Tiandi Company. ”

The document also said: "In the process of restructuring of Guanshengyuan Company, enterprises have violated the system, the relevant departments in Jianghan District have not strictly implemented the restructuring policy, have not conscientiously performed their duties, and have abused their powers due to ineffective supervision, which has led to obstruction of enterprise restructuring, increased the cost of restructuring, caused the loss of some state-owned assets and the risk of further loss; The untimely and inadequate placement of employees has triggered petitions by employees, brought about social instability, and caused a bad impact on society, with extremely serious consequences. In the above-mentioned problems, Liao Futing, former director of the Jianghan District Structural Reform Commission, Yu Guangxin, director of the District Economic and Trade Commission, and Wu Yue, deputy director of the District Economic and Trade Commission, Han Jianqiang, former general manager of Guanshengyuan Company, Yang Benjian, secretary of the party committee, and Li Wei, deputy director of the District State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Office, bear direct responsibility or leadership responsibility for this.

The court ruled that the grounds for invalidity of the agreement were not established

The reporter then consulted the judgment of the Jianghan District People's Court of Wuhan City, and in the judgment, the following statement was made on the question of whether the "Asset Sale Agreement" signed between Wuhan Guanshengyuan and Tiandi Group was valid:

"In this case, after the restructuring was approved by the relevant functional departments of the government, Guanshengyuan Company signed three restructuring agreements after reaching a consensus with Tim Land Group, namely, two Property Rights Transfer Agreements signed on December 19, 2000 and September 18, 2001, and an Asset Sale Agreement signed on December 20, 2001. However, judging from the actual performance of the third agreement, Tiandi Group actually took over the Guanshengyuan Company in an all-round way and was responsible for the placement of employees, and its restructuring form was essentially the same as the previous two contracts. The Asset Sale Agreement sets out the rights and obligations of the parties. After the contract was signed, the relevant government functional departments such as the District Structural Reform Commission and the District State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Office examined and approved the contract, and the content of the contract was performed to a large extent. Although Guanshengyuan Company did not convene a staff congress to vote on the agreement before signing the Asset Sale Agreement, there were certain problems in the restructuring procedure, and the responsible person of Guanshengyuan Company and the personnel of relevant government functional departments also had certain acts of disorder, but on this basis, the validity of the agreement was denied, and there was no legal and administrative law basis for response. Guanshengyuan Company's claim that the parties maliciously colluded to harm the interests of the state lacked sufficient evidence to prove it. In summary, guanshengyuan company's request to confirm the invalidity of the asset sale agreement cannot be established, and the court does not support it. ”

Wuhan Guanshengyuan: Not satisfied with the verdict, continue to appeal

The reporter learned that Wuhan Guanshengyuan was not satisfied with the above judgment and submitted a civil appeal to the Wuhan Intermediate People's Court a few days ago. The appeal pleaded: "The Request for Annulment Judgment between the Appellant (Wuhan Guanshengyuan) and the Appellee (Tim Land Group) is invalid." The following facts and reasons are also presented:

"The Asset Sale Agreement in this case was actually implemented by the appellee (Tim Di Group) on the grounds that the two parties had evaded bank debts, and at the same time, Liao Futing, director of the Former Jianghan District Structural Reform Committee, was present to guarantee that han Jianqiang, the then legal representative of the appellant (Wuhan GuanshengYuan), had been deceived and signed with the appellee (Tim Di Group) without the collective research of the company's leadership team and the discussion and approval of the enterprise staff congress. The signing process of the agreement is a typical fraudulent act, and there is malicious collusion to harm the interests of the state and the collective interests, and the loss of state-owned assets is immeasurable.

"The fraud in the signing process of the above-mentioned Asset Sale Agreement is also manifested in the fact that when the land transfer price is confirmed under the operation of the appellee (Tiandi Group), it is not calculated according to the land appraisal price, but is calculated according to the preferential policy of restructuring and determined according to the funds required for the resettlement of employees. In addition, the agreed price has not yet calculated the ground property with an appraised value of 7.09 million yuan in the factory area, and the unassessed area of state-owned land in the process of transferring land also includes an unassessed area of state-owned land, resulting in a large number of state-owned assets being encroached upon.

"In order to achieve the purpose of transferring the assets of the Asset Sale Agreement to the appellee's name, under the operation of the appellee (Tiandi Group), Han Jianqiang, the former head of the appellant (Wuhan Guansheng Park), fraudulently fabricated the appellant's enterprise employee congress resolution and made a false report to the enterprise market in Jianghan District. At the same time, Liao Futing, the former director of the Jianghan District Structural Reform Commission, was bribed to issue three different content and time approvals under the same document number (that is, the "Jianghan District [2001] No. 250 document number") according to the needs of the appellee, resulting in the loss of state-owned assets, including taxes. For this reason, Liao Futing, former director of the Jianghan District Structural Reform Commission, was tried by law. ”

Jianghan District Government: Guide all parties to take the judicial route

Wang Shanding, deputy director of the Office of the People's Government of Jianghan District, said in an interview with this reporter a few days ago: "Regarding whether the "Asset Sale Agreement" is in violation of the law, it has been conclusive in the previous discipline inspection documents, which violates the provisions of Document No. 102 and transforms the restructuring of Guanshengyuan Company into a simple land transfer behavior. For this reason, some people have violated discipline and the law, and some people have been imprisoned. There were illegal acts throughout the restructuring process and forged documents of the Workers' Congress. ”

Wang Shanding also said: "We believe that justice is the fairest and most just, and we guide all parties to take the judicial route. I believe that all problems will be solved after the judicial decision. ”