Recently, Meng powder lawyers acting on behalf of more than 63 million yuan of attempted, more than 33 million yuan of attempted contract fraud case, after the second trial session remanded for retrial.

The indictment alleges that the defendant Yang September 2022 to 2023 period, fictional Department of their own Norwegian company a brand of shoes rights holder, and then instructed others posing as a brand agent, after the Norwegian brand company in the name of the three shoe company signed a finished shoe procurement contract, after the shoe company will be made of brand shoes exported to Norway, the United States, stranded in the local customs. Has exported shoes worth more than 63 million yuan, not exported shoes worth more than 33 million yuan. The public prosecution alleged that the defendant Yang constitutes contract fraud.

Meng powder lawyers in the first trial stage of intervention in this case, after careful reading, meeting with the review of the evidence in the case, found that the case there are several core issues have not been clarified: First, the evidence in the case can not be denied that the defendant's brand rights in fact from the Vietnamese businessman of Chinese descent, the identity of the Vietnamese businessman is a mystery that can not be clarified; the second is that this case is the key issue that the amount of proceeds of crime can not be determined in the transaction of goods in the contract fraud, regardless of whether the amount of attempted Amount or attempted amount should be the amount of proceeds of crime, that is, the perpetrator of contract fraud through the implementation of fraud can control the illegal gains, but the defendant in this case on the exported, un-exported shoes can not be substantially possessed, to determine that the defendant constitutes the crime of contract fraud, there is no amount of crime can be calculated under this crime; Third, the defendant himself advanced part of the payment for the goods and all the cost of transport to be determined that the contract Fraud its motive does not meet the common sense, if it is recognized as the sale of counterfeit registered trademarks, can reasonably explain all the behavior.

Even if the case has many of the above doubts, the court of first instance still sentenced the defendant Yang Mou contract fraud attempted more than 63 million yuan, attempted more than 33 million yuan, imprisonment for fifteen years. The defendant of the first trial appealed, and then began a long wait, six months after the second trial was held.

In the second trial, Meng powder lawyer insisted on the above views and cross-examined the new evidence retrieved by the second trial court, pointing out that the new evidence of the second trial was favorable to the defendant. The prosecutor of the second trial also raised the problem of the amount of contract fraud, and suggested that the case be remanded for retrial, and finally the court of the second trial ruled that the case be remanded for retrial, and the case was given a chance to be re-tried.

Difficult criminal cases, in addition to the case file, complex facts, the criminal process is long, defense lawyers need to be patient enough to convince the prosecutor, the judge, so that they believe that the case has problems and check the facts in accordance with the law and then sentenced.

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)