"Let's present evidence and cross-examine the evidence. Do the prosecution and defense and the defendant have any new evidence to submit? The presiding judge asked.

"Nope." Tripartite equalization.

"It is up to the prosecutor to present evidence." The presiding judge said.

In addition to the bank transfer records and the seized items and asset certificates, the evidence cited by the procurator is the confessions of Zhou Yingqi and Zhao Xiaojie and the testimony of witnesses, all of which prove the facts of the case and are accepted by the defendant Zhou Yingqi. Fang Yi objected to the purpose of the evidence, arguing that the money received by Zhou Yingqi was not a bribe.

Before the trial, Fang Yi had an interview with Zhou Yingqi, and in order to strive for leniency, Zhou Yingqi could plead guilty and accept punishment in court. Because of the questionable nature of the relevant funds, Fang Yi planned to take the risk of defending her innocence, but Fang Yi made it clear that the probability of the not-guilty defense being accepted was not high, and it mainly depended on the court's determination.

Zhou Yingqi knew that Fang Yi's move was for her sake, so she nodded and agreed to Fang Yi's defense plan.

……

"The facts of this case have been investigated, the court investigation has been completed, and the court arguments are now begining. Court debates revolve around disputed facts that have not been certified by the court and how the law should be applied based on the facts.

The prosecutor will speak first. The presiding judge said.

"Presiding Judge and Judge: We believe that the defendant Zhou Yingqi has committed the crime of embezzlement for the following reasons:

…… Defendant Zhou Yingqi took advantage of his position to provide assistance to Zhao Xiaojie in his job promotion and the handling of the deception of cultural projects he was mainly engaged in, and accepted bribes of 8.18 million yuan; After that, he accepted Zhao Xiaojie's request, used his position to provide business opportunities for Jiayue Company, and accepted 300,000 yuan from Jiayue Company.

Although Zhou Yingqi and Zhao Xiaojie have a special relationship, we believe that the money transferred by Zhao Xiaojie to the defendant Zhou Yingqi was to thank him for taking care of him, so the amount of 8.48 million yuan given by Zhao Xiaojie and Jiayue Company to the defendant Zhou Yingqi should be determined to be the amount of bribes.

In view of the fact that the defendant Zhou Yingqi actively returned the stolen goods and pleaded guilty and accepted punishment, we recommend that the court impose a sentence of 15 years' imprisonment. Complete. The inspector said.

Although Zhou Yingqi in the dock had already been prepared, when the prosecutor said the recommended sentence, her body still trembled, and her eyes were full of horror.

Fifteen years! A person can have a few fifteen years, she is already in her thirties, and in fifteen years she will be like those old women on the street and in the park, she will be old, no matter how beautiful the sunset is, it will be a sunset, where will she go? Thinking of this, she couldn't help but let out a wail in her heart.

"Defendant Zhou Yingqi defended herself." The Inquisitor said coldly.

"All the money I received from Zhao Xiaojie should not be recognized as bribes, most of it is based on the lover relationship between us, the living expenses and house money he gave me, there is no power and money transaction between us, of which only 1.88 million is the cost he gave me to let me be promoted for him......" Zhou Yingqi's mind was a little confused, and she tried her best to maintain her composure.

"Defendant Zhou Yingqi's defender expresses his defense opinions." The presiding judge said.

"Presiding judge and judge: The defender believes that defendant Zhou Yingqi's acceptance of money from Zhao Xiaojie and Jiayue Company does not constitute the crime of accepting bribes. Here's why:

1. The nature of defendant Zhou Yingqi's acceptance of Zhao Xiaojie's 8.18 million yuan should be found to be funds to maintain the relationship between the two parties, and should not be treated as bribes.

1. The nature of defendant Zhou Yingqi's acceptance of Zhao Xiaojie's 8.18 million yuan should be analyzed from various aspects such as the emotional background between the two parties, the economic exchanges, and the correspondence between the solicitation and the receipt of property, and the transfer of money should not be found to be bribery.

2. According to the evidentiary materials provided by the procuratorate, the correspondence between the defendant Zhou Yingqi's act of accepting money from Zhao Xiaojie and Zhao Xiaojie's request for entrustment is not clear and unambiguous, and given that there is a lover relationship between the two parties, and that there is a certain degree of confusion in personal property, the financial exchanges between the two parties are also normal, and the reasonable suspicion that the two are living together for the purpose of marriage cannot be ruled out.

3. According to the evidence provided by the prosecutor, the defendant Zhou Yingqi and Zhao Xiaojie had a lover relationship for four years, and they were ready to live together, and in view of the intimacy of the two parties, the defendant Zhou Yingqi gave Zhao Xiaojie advice and whistleblowing, and even engaged in mediation activities for Zhao Xiaojie in terms of career promotion and accountability.

4. According to the evidence provided by the public prosecution, the defendants Zhou Yingqi and Zhao Xiaojie subjectively did not regard the transfer as a transaction, but believed that it was a voluntary contribution driven by emotional factors.

2. Defendant Zhou Yingqi's acceptance of 300,000 yuan from Jiayue Company does not constitute the crime of accepting bribes.

Defendant Zhou Yingqi did not have the authority to help Jiayue Company obtain the business of a technology company, and the defendant considered his close relationship with Zhao Xiaojie and recommended the Jiayue Company started by his relatives Zou Jia and Zhao Yue to the technology company out of emotional factors, and there was no improper interest between the two parties.

Article 388 of the Criminal Law stipulates that a state functionary who takes advantage of his or her authority or position to seek improper benefits for the trustee through the conduct of other state functionaries in his or her official position, solicits or accepts property from the trustee, shall be punished as accepting bribes.

Although the defendant Zhou Yingqi had violated the rules, the motive for her actions was entirely due to her intimate relationship with Zhao Xiaojie, and there were no improper interests, which did not comply with the above-mentioned legal provisions, so the defendant's conduct was not a bribery. Complete. Fang Yi said.

Fang Yi knew that his defense was a little weak in reasoning, but the procuratorate's defense opinions were full of loopholes, and they were not much better than himself. But as long as there is a reasonable doubt, not the only conclusion, the defence is half the battle. The rest depends on what the court decides.

……

"In the case of the defendant Zhou Yingqi who was prosecuted by the Municipal People's Procuratorate for accepting bribes, the collegial panel held a court trial, conducted a court investigation and court debate, heard the prosecutor's accusations, the defendant's opinions, the defendant's defenses, statements, and the defender's defense opinions, and the court trial was concluded. The court is now adjourned, and the collegial panel will announce the verdict at a later date after deliberation. Bring the defendant out of the courtroom. "After the presiding judge rang the gavel, the court trial ended.

The presiding judge did not announce the verdict in court, and the hearts of Zhou Yingqi and her family were still hanging, not knowing how the court would decide in the end.

After the case was transferred to the court, because Zhou Yingqi's bail period had not yet expired, the Intermediate People's Court held that Zhou Yingqi met the conditions for release on bail pending further investigation, so it continued to be released on bail pending trial.

(Article 79 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that the people's courts, people's procuratorates, and public security organs must not release a criminal suspect or defendant on bail pending further investigation for a maximum of 12 months)

(End of chapter)