At the end of 2018, A was criminally filed on suspicion of provoking trouble, but A did not know it.2021 After accepting the commission, Xu Wei, a lawyer from Kyoto Law Firm, promptly communicated with the case-handling authorities and applied for a review of the criminal case to the procuratorate, and the public security authorities ultimately withdrew the case.

A strange civil case triggered a criminal case

In 2019, A found me, hoping that I could help him get off the "blacklist".

It turns out that in 2013, A bought a construction vehicle from B by installment payment. After the quality problems of the construction vehicle, the two sides had a dispute, the contractual counterparty A company filed a lawsuit, but A did not receive notice of the hearing, A lost the judgment has come into effect, A is listed as a bad faith executor.

I investigated and researched and found that B registered A's contact information with Company A as a blank number and the contact address was wrong. What is even more strange is that a total of 21 similar cases have been publicized, and the defendants in 17 cases failed to appear in court, and the court made a default judgment, with all of them in favor of Company A.

After many rounds of negotiations with Company A, Company A finally agreed to withdraw the application for enforcement against A, and A also gave up the complaint.

Unexpectedly, after more than 1 year of peace, A found me again, saying that it was still the same thing, but this time he was criminally prosecuted.

Because, in order to force B to come forward to solve the previous loss of construction vehicles and the problem of being listed as a defaulter executor, A seized B's construction vehicles.

After accepting the commission, I first went to the criminal police to get in touch with the contractor, and learned that A suspected of the crime of "provoking trouble", I briefly stated my opinion to the contractor, this is just a private relief behavior, does not constitute a crime.

Second, the development of the defense

The crime of provoking trouble has almost become a well-known "pocket crime", in order to save A from the pocket, my lawyer's opinion totaled 73 pages, more than 40,000 words, 10 pages for the main opinion, the remaining 63 pages are annexed.

The lawyer's opinion as a whole is divided into three parts, the first part is the description of the basic case, the second part is the legal analysis that A does not constitute the crime of provoking trouble, and the third part is the suggestion about the dispute resolution of this case.

Regarding the part of legal analysis, the main opinions are:

1

According to the judicial interpretation of the crime, at the time of the case, the police did not criticize the car impounding to stop or give administrative punishment, the case should not be directly charged with this behavior as the crime of provoking trouble;

2

A in this case, there is no "seeking excitement, venting emotions, show off" motive, does not constitute the crime of provoking trouble;

3

B sold engineering vehicles with quality problems, failed to repair the vehicles as promised, and negatively dealt with after-sale matters, causing huge losses to A. This is an important cause of conflict between the two parties, and there is a causal relationship between his behavior and the results of the impoundment of the vehicle, which should not be separated from the impoundment of the vehicle to be evaluated separately;

4

A deducted the project car is forced to choose, the use of a more legitimate way to pursue B personal responsibility does not have the possibility of expectation;

5

Criminal means is a national weapon, has the modesty, only in civil, administrative means can not solve the problem can be used, in practice and the case of similar disputes, a party can file a civil lawsuit for the return of the original solution.

When we submitted the opinion, did not get a timely response from the contractor, so I will also be the opinion of the criminal police team leader and the head of the legal system section copied.

Third, the procuratorate notified the public security organs to withdraw the case

The head of the criminal police team received us in a timely manner and, in accordance with the comments we made, allowed B to collect the construction vehicle from A. He also indicated that if A and B could reach a settlement, the public security authorities would take the initiative to withdraw the case. However, B proposed a high compensation of 1.6 million yuan, which A could not accept.

We then applied to the procuratorate at the same level for supervision of the criminal case and submitted additional new evidence. Eventually, the procuratorate examined the case and concluded that A did not constitute a criminal offense, and notified the public security authorities to withdraw the case.

The public security authorities, on the other hand, insisted that the procuratorate's notification was wrong and requested the procuratorate to review the case, suggesting that they would do so with a higher procuratorate. During the review, B proposed to reduce the amount of compensation to about 100,000 yuan, and A agreed to mediation after careful consideration. Eventually, A and B reached a settlement and the public security authorities dropped the case.

IV. Warning

So far, from the case to withdraw the case took more than three years, more than three years, A's work and life has been seriously affected: the loss of up to hundreds of thousands of dollars to buy a car, was listed as "old man", was listed as a suspect, compensation for the loss of B. If A had actively utilized the law to defend his rights in the initial civil dispute, hired professionals to intervene as early as possible, and did not blindly use other means to defend his rights, this type of tragedy could have been avoided.