Former title: The second instance judgment of the fraud protest and appeal case of 63 people including Xie Liuqing (quotation)

34 defendants who were acquitted in the first instance were found guilty (theme)

Reporter Li Guangming

Legal Daily Wuhu (Anhui), May 22 On May 22, the Intermediate People's Court of Wuhu City, Anhui Province publicly sentenced 63 defendants, including Xie Liuqing, to protest and appeal for fraud, and sentenced the defendant Xie Liuqing to 15 years' imprisonment for fraud and a fine of 15 million yuan; 43 defendants, including Liu Yanfang, were sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment ranging from 12 years to six months of criminal detention and fined for fraud; 11 defendants who committed minor crimes such as Chen Dan were exempted from criminal punishment, and 8 defendants who committed significant minor crimes such as Wang Mengge were acquitted.

It is found through trial that since 2012, a criminal group led by Xie Liuqing has set up Beijing Zhongjin Dingsheng International Art Collection Co., Ltd. and other companies in Zhengzhou and Beijing in the name of others to sell products to customers by means of deceptive means such as fictitious product author, fictitious author authorization, fictitious author title and achievement, posing as an auction house, and promising to buy back, so as to defraud Anhui, Heilongjiang The victims' money in nearly 20 provinces (districts and cities), including Sichuan, Beijing and Inner Mongolia, totaled more than 16.7 million yuan.

On October 27, 2016, the victim Chen reported to the Chengguan Police Station of Fanchang County Public Security Bureau for investigation. On August 15, 2018, the People's Procuratorate of Fanchang County filed a public prosecution to the People's Court of Fanchang County, accusing 63 people, including the defendant Xie Liuqing, of committing fraud. On February 1 and March 12, 2021, the People's Court of Fanchang County sentenced 21 people, including Xie Liuqing and Liu Yanfang, to be guilty and 42 people were acquitted. After the judgment of first instance, the People's Procuratorate of Fanchang District, Wuhu City filed a protest and 21 defendants filed an appeal.

During the second instance, both the prosecution and the defense submitted a large amount of evidence. The Wuhu Intermediate People's Court held a public hearing in accordance with the law and fully listened to the opinions of both the prosecution and the defense.

The Wuhu Intermediate People's Court held that Xie Liuqing and others organized and implemented a number of fraud activities for the purpose of illegal possession, and their acts constituted a crime of fraud. The number of participants in this case is large, the main members are stable, the organization is tight, and the division of labor is clear, forming a criminal group with Xie Liuqing as the leader, Liu Yanfang and Zhang Hongfang as the principal offenders, and other participants as ordinary members. The criminal group targeted the middle-aged and elderly to defraud the unspecified public, repeatedly luring the victims to buy the products involved in the case, or repeatedly selling to the same victim, even knowing that the victim's family situation was poor and needed to borrow money, it continued to defraud them, so that many victims were in debt and sold houses to repay their debts. According to the facts and evidence ascertained, the court made the aforesaid judgment in accordance with the law, taking into account the facts, nature, circumstances and confession and repentance of each defendant's crime.

In the second instance, 34 of the 42 defendants who were acquitted in the first instance were found guilty; Xie Liuqing, the ringleader of the criminal group, was given an increase of two years' imprisonment, and other principal criminals were also given an appropriate increase in punishment; For some accomplices, the punishment was appropriately mitigated or the sentence was suspended; The defendant whose circumstances are minor shall be exempted from criminal punishment, and the defendant whose circumstances are obviously minor and do little harm shall be declared innocent. Several defendants who pleaded guilty in the first instance and were sentenced to probation were sentenced to a full sentence because they retracted their confession in the second instance.