"Okay, in response to the defender's defense opinion, we mainly make the following points:

In this case, the appellant, Yu Sanqiang, used the means of selling assets to evade debts when the loan was about to expire, and had obvious intention to illegally take possession of the loan.

The accounts of the two companies under the appellant's name were not only chaotic, but also complicated in the exchange of funds, and it was impossible to clearly match the money received from the transfer of assets with the company's expenditure.

To sum up, we believe that the appellant in this case, for the purpose of illegally taking possession of the loan, transferred the collateral before the loan expired, and transferred the transfer money between the two affiliated companies, so as to achieve the purpose of confusing the audition. His conduct has constituted the crime of loan fraud. Complete. The prosecutor responded indignantly to the defender's comments.

"The defender may respond to the prosecutor's opinion." After the presiding judge finished speaking, he looked at Fang Yi.

"Based on the prosecutor's defense and response, the defense counsel issued the following defense opinions:

The defender believes that to determine whether the appellant Yu Sanqiang has committed the crime of loan fraud, it is necessary to first analyze whether the appellant subjectively has the purpose of illegal possession.

The 'purpose of unlawful possession' is a subjective mental activity of the appellant, which is often expressed through his objective conduct.

Some acts can directly prove that the borrower has the subjective purpose of illegal possession, such as the actor using a false title certificate as security, obtaining a loan from a financial institution, and then fleeing with the money.

However, some acts can only indirectly prove that the borrower has the possibility of illegally taking possession of the loan, but cannot directly prove that the borrower subjectively has the purpose of illegal possession, for example, fabricating false reasons for introducing funds to obtain loans, using false supporting documents to obtain loans, etc. In this case, other evidence is required to prove that the borrower had the purpose of unlawful possession.

According to the Minutes of the National Symposium on the Trial of Financial Crime Cases by Courts issued by the Supreme People's Court, in judicial practice, the principle of consistency between subjectivity and objectivity should be adhered to in determining whether the borrower has the purpose of illegal possession.

According to the content of the minutes, where the borrower illegally obtains funds through fraudulent means, resulting in a relatively large amount of funds that cannot be returned, and in any of the following circumstances, it may be found to have the purpose of illegal possession:

1. Knowingly not having the ability to return a large amount of funds by fraud;

2. Fleeing after illegally obtaining funds;

3. Recklessly squandering funds by fraud;

4. Using fraudulently obtained funds to carry out illegal and criminal activities;

5. Evading or transferring funds, or concealing assets in order to evade the return of funds;

6. Concealing or destroying accounts, or engaging in fake bankruptcy or bankruptcy in order to evade the return of funds;

7. Other acts of illegally taking possession of funds and refusing to return them.

Moreover, the minutes also clearly stated that when dealing with specific cases, if there is evidence to prove that the borrower did not have the purpose of illegal possession, it cannot be punished as the crime of financial fraud simply because the property cannot be returned.

According to the above-mentioned minutes, the defender believes that the following three conditions must be met at the same time to determine whether the borrower subjectively has the purpose of illegally taking possession of the loan:

First, the borrower obtained the loan by fraudulent means;

second, the borrower fails to repay the loan when due;

Third, when the borrower takes out the loan, he knows that he does not have the ability to repay the loan, or after the loan has fled with the money, wantonly squandered the loan, evaded or transferred funds, concealed assets, etc., in order to evade the repayment of the loan.

Only when the borrower meets the above three conditions at the same time can it be determined that the borrower subjectively has the purpose of illegally taking possession of the loan.

In this case, the appellant Yu Sanqiang did not have the seven circumstances specified in the minutes, there was no fraud in handling the loan, and the failure to repay the loan when it expired was not the result of his pursuit, but a normal commercial risk. The available evidence also does not prove that after the loan expired, the appellant fled with the money, wantonly squandered the loan, evaded, transferred funds, and concealed property.

In summary, the defender argued that the appellant Yu Sanqiang did not have the purpose of illegally taking possession of the loan in this case. It does not constitute the crime of loan fraud. Complete. Fang Yi had long expected that the other party would make a fuss about illegal possession, so he focused on preparing in this regard.

……

After nearly two hours of verbal warfare, the trial finally ended.

Yu Sanqiang, who was sitting in the seat of the above-mentioned people, watched the defender and the prosecutor fight with each other, to be honest, it was the first time he had seen such a fierce court duel, although he knew most of the "words" in the words of the two sides, but what it meant to be together, he was really a little confused.

He remembered that when he was in the first trial, his defender, Lawyer Ma, simply read the manuscript for less than 20 minutes and ended it hastily, but he didn't dare to confront the prosecutor so much.

After the adjournment, the presiding judge pronounced the verdict on the same day.

"The case has been deliberated by the collegial panel and a judgment has been formed. In response to the opinions of the prosecution and defense, combined with the focus of the dispute in this case, and based on the facts and evidence of this case, this court makes the following comments:

…… The appellant, Yu Sanqiang, did not take fraudulent means at the time of the loan, but only sold the collateral in the process of repaying the loan, and if the mortgage was legal and valid, the credit union could take legal measures to recover the collateral at any time, and the loan would not be recovered.

(The meaning is very clear, the credit union should not be a whole day long, manage your own business personnel, do the risk control in place, train the business knowledge, and have a long snack!) If you really can't hire a few people who understand the law, don't think about getting promoted all day long)

After Yu Sanqiang transferred the collateral, he did take the means of litigation to recover the collateral, so the grounds of appeal that Yu Sanqiang did not constitute the crime of loan fraud were supported, and the original trial court found that Yu Sanqiang committed the crime of loan fraud could not be established. Verdict: Yu Sanqiang is not guilty. The presiding judge's voice echoed through the courtroom, and everyone listened with bated breath.

After the verdict was announced, Yu Sanqiang let out a sigh of relief, and there was excitement in his eyes: Lawyer Fang is good enough to spray, and he really fished me out.

Fang Yi finally breathed a sigh of relief, humming a song and starting to clean up the case file materials on the table with Zhou Ying. Zhou Ying secretly said while loading the case file into the file bag: The happiness of a criminal lawyer is really incomprehensible to others, especially the lead lawyer.

Yu Sangen walked out of the courthouse, sat in the car on the side of the road and waited for his brother Yu Sanqiang, took out his mobile phone and dialed out: "Lawyer Wan, the result of the case here is out, and my brother was found not guilty." It's time to move on...... Don't worry, I'll call you 1.7 million yuan to settle my brother's lawyer's fees first.

I will give you 500,000 yuan for the 1 million lawyer's fees for non-performing assets, and I will pay you the rest of the money as agreed.

You can rest assured, I will sign a legal counsel agreement with you for the construction company, and all the lawsuits arising from our company's construction projects will be handled by your team. ”

(End of chapter)