Five years ago, Mr. Li of the local Red Sun Advertising Company borrowed one million yuan from Mr. Meng's brother Wang Liang because he was in urgent need of capital turnover, and the two parties agreed on a monthly interest rate (simple interest) of three cents, a loan period of 12 months, and a total of 1.36 million yuan in principal and interest.

The loan agreement reads: "Red Sun Advertising Company today borrowed Wang Liang cash of 10,000 yuan for the company's business turnover, the loan period is 12 months, from the date of actual occurrence of the loan, the amount will be returned within 12 months without interest." The borrower, Red Sun Advertising Company, and the joint and several liability guarantor Li Changshun".

After that, Li Changshun of Red Sun Advertising Company repaid all the principal and interest of the loan on time, but he forgot to ask Wang Liang for an IOU.

At the beginning of last year, Wang Liang found the original loan agreement of the Red Sun Advertising Company when he was packing up the safe, so he took the loan agreement to the court and sued the Red Sun Advertising Company and Li Changshun, demanding that the Red Sun Advertising Company return the loan of 1.36 million yuan and the interest on the delayed repayment, and Li Changshun should bear joint and several guarantee liability.

Later, the court held a trial of the case, and the Red Sun Advertising Company naturally did not recognize Wang Liang's claim, and replied that it had repaid all the loans, and the loan had passed the statute of limitations, and did not agree to mediation.

Subsequently, the people's court issued a civil judgment, rejecting Wang Liang's claim on the grounds that the loan had exceeded the statute of limitations.

After getting the verdict, Wang Liang consulted a lawyer, and the lawyer said that if a witness can prove that he had asked Red Sun Company or Li Changshun for a loan within two years from the date of maturity of the loan (the previous statute of limitations was two years, after the promulgation of the Civil Code, the statute of limitations was three years), it would lead to the interruption of the statute of limitations, so as to recalculate the statute of limitations, and so on, the statute of limitations would be fine.

Later, when paying the consulting fee, the lawyer saw that Wang Liang was generous, and specially reminded him that the person who was best to follow him to collect the money had no immediate family relationship with him and had no interest.

After Wang Liang understood the consultation, the thief did not die and appealed to the Intermediate People's Court. During this period, he asked two friends, Niu Tianlai and Zhao Peng, to testify against him, proving that they had followed Wang Liang to the Red Sun Advertising Company many times to ask Li Changshun for debts, and gave false testimony.

At the second-instance trial, his two friends, Niu Tianlai and Zhao Peng, really "lived up to the trust" and testified in court separately, and what they said was tight.

At that time, when the second-instance trial was opened, Li Changshun of the Red Sun Advertising Company was so angry that he was speechless, and Wang Liang sat in the appellant's seat triumphantly.

Later, after mediation by the judge, Red Sun Advertising Company finally agreed to pay Wang Liangyan 10,000 yuan to settle the case, and the court issued a civil mediation letter on the same day.

The matter should be over here, but people are not as good as heaven, and less than three months after Wang Liang got the 10,000 yuan transferred by Li Changshun, he received a summons from the public security department.

It turned out that his friend Niu Tianlai was arrested by the police for participating in the opening of a casino, and in order to make meritorious service and reduce his sentence during the interrogation, he told Wang Liang about the false lawsuit. The police didn't expect that there would be an unexpected gain, and immediately summoned Wang Liang.

Faced with Niu Tianlai's evidence, Wang Liang had no choice but to confess truthfully and confess that he had colluded with Niu Tianlai and Zhao Peng in a false lawsuit. After that, the case was transferred to the Public Prosecutor's Office, which reviewed the case file and transferred it to the court for prosecution.

The court of first instance held that Wang Liang violated the normal judicial order by instructing others to give false testimony, and his conduct constituted the crime of obstructing testimony; Defendant Zhao Peng was instructed by Wang Liang to help him provide false testimony in court, violating normal judicial order, and the circumstances were serious, and his conduct constituted the crime of aiding in fabricating evidence.

Niu Tianlai was involved in the case of opening a casino, so it was handled separately.

Finally, in accordance with the provisions of Article 307, Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, the court ruled that: 1. Defendant Wang Liang committed the crime of obstructing testimony and was sentenced to one year and six months imprisonment; 2. Defendant Zhao Peng committed the crime of aiding in the fabrication of evidence and was sentenced to one year imprisonment.

After the first-instance verdict was announced, Wang Liang and Zhao Peng were not satisfied and prepared to appeal on the grounds that the facts found in the original judgment were unclear and the law was wrongly applied. Mr. Meng and Wang Liang have a good relationship, and Zhao Peng is the person in charge of Mr. Meng's local branch, so he wants to pull them along, find a lawyer to consult, and see if there is a chance to overturn the case.

"The facts of the case you are talking about are very similar to one of my previous cases.

Of course, I didn't see the case file or the defendant, if what you said is true, your friend Wang Liang basically has a very small chance of overturning the case, he instructed others to give false testimony, and there is Niu Tianlai's confession and the second-instance civil mediation agreement, I personally feel that there is no problem in the determination of facts in the criminal case, there is no major problem in sentencing, and the judge has discretion ......, so this case is likely to be rejected by the second-instance court and the original verdict will be upheld.

Of course, it cannot be ruled out that the lawyer who is now providing Wang Liang's defense is of a higher level than me, and he understands the facts of the case better, so he may be able to find a breakthrough. Fang Yi said.

"What about Zhao Peng? He just testified in court, and he didn't get any benefits, and he was sentenced to a year? Can his testimony be used as evidence for a crime?

The lawyer told me that Zhao Peng's testimony in court in the civil lawsuit did not belong to the "evidence" in the crime of aiding in the fabrication of evidence, and his conduct did not reach the level of "serious circumstances", so it should not be found to be the crime of aiding in the fabrication of evidence. Mr. Meng said.

His idea is very simple, two people, no matter which one they are, can fish out one is one.

"I believe that Zhao Peng deliberately perjured in court in the civil lawsuit, seriously disrupting the normal judicial order, and causing the Red Sun Advertising Company to suffer actual property losses, which is relatively harmful to society, and Zhao Peng does constitute the crime of aiding in falsifying evidence." Fang Yi thought for a while.

"Well, I later consulted a college classmate who is a lawyer, and he told me that in the crime of helping to falsify evidence, the evidence destroyed and fabricated by the perpetrator should be limited to physical evidence, documentary evidence, appraisal conclusions, inquests, examination records, and audio-visual materials. He said that it had to be 'objectified' evidence and that non-objectified evidence did not fall within the scope of evidence for this crime.

Lawyer Fang, don't laugh at me, I understand that the objectification he said must have physical objects that can be seen and touched, and words have no basis and cannot be used as evidence of a crime.

I don't know if I understand it right. Mr. Meng looked at Fang Yidao with a serious face.

Fang Yi smiled and said in his heart: You are asking me to comment on the views of my peers in disguise, isn't this pulling hatred? I don't do the work of offending people. Besides, what qualifications do I have to comment on other people's opinions, and I'm not an "expert" who messes around all day. But people ask so, don't comment, but can explain their own opinions.

(End of chapter)