Recently, by the Beijing King&Capital law firm XuWei lawyers team undertook the theft case in the first trial - second trial - retrial after a number of procedures, achieved good defense results. The court on the client's final verdict from the original first trial of 6 years of imprisonment reduced to 4 years of imprisonment, the lawyer team defense so that the overall theft amount is determined to reduce 50%, other co-defendants also reduced by about 30% of the sentence, the defendant did not appeal, and ultimately achieve an effective defense.

This case has gone through many twists and turns, through a number of criminal proceedings, the specific facts and processes can be found in: “case handbook | small car can pull away 4 tons of cable? Xu Wei's team visited and investigated the case on the ground to clarify the truth of the case”.

The controversy in this case lies in the determination of the amount of the theft. Although the defendants confessed to the theft, but the amount of the determination of the existence of large objections, that the amount of the determination is too high. In this case, the prosecution mainly to the victim to provide purchase vouchers or lost list to determine the number of stolen items and the amount of money. The defense pointed out that in this case, the stolen goods have been lost, directly based on the materials provided by the victim to determine the number of theft and the amount of major errors. From the basis of the determination, the stolen goods in the price determination did not take into account the depreciation of the part, resulting in the price determination of the conclusion of the opinion of the price of the stolen goods higher than the purchase price of the anomalous phenomenon. From the point of view of the number of items identified, based on the market survey and the specification characteristics of the stolen items, the difference between the calculated and identified quantities was too great, which was in serious contradiction with common sense and common sense.

Although the defense failed to come up with new evidence, but due to the defense of clear logic, persuasive, in the retrial of the first trial process, the Procuratorate adopted the views of the defense, the number of items involved and the price of the determination of the standard used in favor of the defendant, the amount of money involved in the case as a whole downward adjusted by 50%, to make a change in the prosecution's decision, the defense has also sought to part of the victim's understanding, and ultimately, the court ruled the result is much lower than the original Sentence of first instance. After the sentence was pronounced, the party concerned said that the sentence did not appeal, now the sentence has come into effect, the family and the party concerned are satisfied with the lawyer's work.