Recently, a case involving the illegal sale of Beijing household registration (hukou) was handled by lawyer Li Xiaoxi, resulting in the case being dismissed. The defense lawyer skillfully dissected the evidence chain, successfully defusing the charges.

Image
The Criminal Risks Behind Hukou Quota Transactions

In early 2024, Y, the legal representative of a technology company, was transferred for prosecution on suspicion of buying and selling official documents, certificates, and seals of state organs. The indictment alleged that between 2019 and 2020, Y had arranged for a foreign student named Li to obtain a Beijing household registration by falsely processing employee onboarding and illegally applying for household registration documents, in exchange for a fee of 30,000 yuan, thereby violating Article 280 of the Criminal Law. If convicted, Y could face up to three years in prison.

Image
Reconstructing the Case Facts

(1) Key facts are in doubt: The evidence on file cannot corroborate the key facts of the case, resulting in unclear facts and insufficient evidence.

After reviewing the case files, the lawyer found contradictions in the statements made by the company's legal representative Y and the witnesses regarding the method of payment for the Beijing household registration service fee and the amount of the service fee.

Whether Y received bribes while assisting others in obtaining Beijing household registration through the company is contradicted by conflicting statements in the case files, and there is no other objective evidence to corroborate this.

Legal Characterization

According to the “evidence must be sufficient and conclusive” standard under Article 55 of the Criminal Procedure Law, conflicting statements cannot form a complete chain of evidence, and there is no objective evidence such as bank transfer records to corroborate the allegations. Therefore, the facts regarding Y's alleged gains are in doubt.

(2) Substantive denial of interest exchange: overturning the criminal motive

Y's motive for providing household registration quotas was to obtain additional company household registration application quotas, not monetary transactions. According to Article 280 of the Criminal Law, the crime of buying and selling official documents requires “illegal economic interests” as an element, and policy arbitrage does not fall within the statutory scope of “buying and selling.”

Through the above defense, Attorney Li Xiaoxi persuaded the procuratorate to recognize:

1. Minor criminal circumstances: The involved amount was small, and the social harmfulness was low (Article 37 of the Criminal Law);

2. Mitigating circumstances: Y confessed and pleaded guilty, and made a frank confession (Article 15 of the Criminal Procedure Law and Article 67, Paragraph 3 of the Criminal Law).

Final Disposition

The procuratorate made a decision not to prosecute based on Article 177, Paragraph 2 of the Criminal Procedure Law, which states, “Where the circumstances of the crime are minor and no criminal penalty is required.”