Recently, the case of Ruifeng Tianli Company executives suspected of illegally absorbing public deposits, undertaken by King&Capital Law Firm's Liu Ji Hui, was pronounced at the first trial: the court finally adopted the opinion of the defense lawyers and adjusted the sentencing recommendation of the Procuratorate (11 to 12 years) and sentenced the client to 7 years, which realized a good defense effect and gained the client's high recognition.

At the end of 2023, the executives of Ruifeng Tianli Company and other people were criminally detained by a branch of Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau for the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits, and were later transferred to the prosecutor's office for examination and prosecution. One week before the case was prosecuted by the Procuratorate, the family of the client learned from the original lawyer that the Procuratorate's recommendation for the client's sentencing was more than ten years. This was simply unacceptable to the person concerned and his family. So, the family of the client after several weeks to find King&Capital Law Firm and entrusted Liu Ji Hui lawyer for defense.

Due to the urgency of time, the defense lawyer intervention, the first time to read the file and arrange a meeting, a comprehensive understanding of the case. Found that although the person in charge of the company's internal control, industrial and commercial registration for the company's supervisors, but according to its job duties and performance of duties and other executives of the company with a certain difference, it is not appropriate in accordance with the company's status and role of executives to issue a recommendation for sentencing. Defense lawyers actively collect favorable evidence to form an opinion submitted to the Procuratorate, and repeatedly communicate with the prosecutor. The prosecutor was resolute and considered that there was no problem with the sentencing recommendation of 11 to 12 years. The case was quickly brought to court.

At the trial stage, the defense lawyer again submitted evidence and opinions, and repeatedly communicated with the judge, who indicated that he would pay attention to the issue during the trial. I did not expect the trial, the judge reprimanded the client in court that the Procuratorate's determination is not a problem, the client felt great pressure, the defense lawyer immediately responded to this. In the court questioning, the defense lawyer through the same case of a number of defendants cross-examination, to discover the company car, reimbursement rights and other facts in favor of the client, fully expressed the defense, and ultimately attracted the attention of the court. After the court, the defense lawyer continued to communicate with the judge, the judge's attitude and said that he would take these factors into account, let patiently wait for the results. Eventually, the first instance decision adopted the views of the defense counsel, in the Procuratorate sentencing recommendations on the basis of the client downgrade significantly reduced sentence. The work of the defense lawyers was highly recognized by the client.