Recently, Mr. Zhang Qiming defended the case of Xu Mou suspected of fund-raising fraud, which lasted for one year and three months, and was remanded for retrial by a provincial high court in the second instance, which found that the facts were unclear and the evidence was insufficient.

The appellant Xu Mou, a private equity fund company, the real controller, the court of first instance ruled that Xu Mou constitutes the crime of fund-raising fraud, sentenced to life imprisonment, and deprivation of political rights for life. It was found that during the period of managing the private equity fund company, Xu issued nearly one hundred fund products and raised 8.2 billion yuan of capital, with most of them "not filed", "investing before raising", "over-raising", "self-raising", and "self-financing". ", "self-financing" and other non-compliance behavior, and after judicial audit, found that Xu and his family members have squandered and other illegal possession of funds.

After the judgment of the first trial, Xu appealed, and through his family appointed Zhang Qiming as the defender of the second trial.

Private fund companies, with the deterioration of the financing environment and the accumulation of bad debts, are often prone to break through the red line of "compliance" in the middle and late stages of operation. In judicial practice, there is a tendency of felonization in cases involving particularly large sums of money. Especially in the investigation and evidence collection process, the case-handling authorities and auditing authorities to guide each other, the cycle of credibility, deliberately formed "illegal possession of funds" oriented audit report. Numerous factors are interlocked, in the first trial is very likely to be recognized as a crime of fraud, which will lead to fund-raising and investors lose, the debtor to evade the debt unfair results.

In the second trial, unraveling the "nine rings" of capital fraud "the first ring" is to break through the audit report. Under the banner of rationality and science, with figures and logic as the main battlefield, the "hard contact" between the legal people and accountants in the space or face to face is often the key to the success or failure of such cases.