Current location - Trademark Inquiry Complete Network - Overdue credit card - How should the main text of the judgment be expressed when the probation is revoked
How should the main text of the judgment be expressed when the probation is revoked

1. According to the provisions of Article 77 of the Criminal Law, if a declared criminal commits a new crime within the probation period of probation or finds that there are other crimes that have not been decided before the verdict is pronounced, his probation shall be revoked, and a judgment shall be made for the newly committed crime or the newly discovered crime, and the punishment imposed for the former crime and the latter crime shall be decided according to the provisions of Article 69 of this Law.

2. Example of expression: Wenzhou Intermediate People's Court of Zhejiang Province-Decision on Criminal Matters -(215) Zhewen Criminal Final Word No.563

The former public prosecution organ was Cangnan People's Procuratorate of Zhejiang Province.

Appellant (defendant in the original trial) Yu Chang 'an. Now detained in Cangnan County Detention Center.

Appellant (defendant in the original trial) Xiao, who is currently detained in Cangnan County Detention Center.

The Cangnan County People's Court of Zhejiang Province tried the case in which the Cangnan County People's Procuratorate accused the defendants Yu Chang 'an and Xiao Mou of committing fraud in the original trial, and made a criminal judgment (214) Wen Cang Xing Chu Zi No.1422 on March 16th, 215. The defendants in the original trial, Yu Chang 'an and Xiao Mou, refused to accept the appeal. Our court formed a collegial panel according to law. After reading the papers and interrogating the appellant, it decided not to hold a trial because the facts were clear. The trial is now over.

the original judgment found that:

? 1. On April 18th, 213, after the defendant Xiao Mou and "Adong" (handled in another case) conspired to rent a vehicle for mortgage loan, Xiao Mou went to Hongxin Car Rental of Chen Mou B, No.348 Yongning Road, Oubei Town, Yongjia County to rent a Zhejiang C c××××× car (worth 182,44 yuan) with Zheng Yingzhi as the owner, and then they forged the motor vehicle registration certificate and other materials. The car involved has now been taken back by the victim.

? 2. On May 29th, 213, after the defendant Yu Chang 'an and Jin Shunliang (handled separately) and "Ding Mingjun" (unknown) conspired to rent a vehicle for mortgage loan, Yu Chang 'an pretended to be Chen Xianhu as the actual lessee, and went to Wenzhou Zhongxin Car Rental Co., Ltd., No.49, Yongzhong Luodong North Street, Longwan District, Wenzhou, to rent the victim Liu's Zhejiang c×××××. Later, Jin Shunliang forged motor vehicle driving license, ID card and other materials, and in the name of the owner Liu, Yu Chang 'an made a mortgage loan of 36, yuan to the victim Chen Moujia. The car involved has now been taken back by the victim.

? 3. On June 14th, 213, Yu Chang 'an, together with Ding Mingjun, went to Zhongxin Car Rental Co., Ltd. of the victims Liu and Cai at No.49, Luodong North Street, Yongzhong, Longwan District, Wenzhou City. Yu Chang 'an pretended to be Chen Xianhu as the actual lessee, and Ding Mingjun signed a lease contract to defraud the victim Cai's Zhejiang C ×××××××× Toyota off-road vehicle (worth 151). After that, Yu Chang 'an mortgaged the car to Chen Moujia and borrowed 36, yuan for gambling. The car involved has now been taken back by the victim.

? The evidences to confirm the above facts are: statements of victims Chen Mou B, Liu, Cai and Chen A, second-hand car sales contract, personal loan contract, vehicle handover settlement book, driver's license, price appraisal opinions, criminal judgment, administrative punishment decision, release certificate, the process of bringing the case to justice, demographic information, and confessions of defendants Xiao and Yu Chang 'an.

? The court of first instance found that the defendant Yu Chang 'an was guilty of fraud, sentenced to five years and six months in prison and fined 5, yuan; The defendant Xiao was convicted of fraud, sentenced to three years and six months in prison and fined RMB3,. Revoke the probation declared by the People's Court of ouhai district, Wenzhou City, Zhejiang Province (213) No.542 criminal judgment of Wen 'ou Criminal Chu Zi; He was sentenced to six months in prison with the original crime of credit card fraud, and was fined 2, yuan. He decided to execute three years and nine months in prison and fined 5, yuan; The defendant Yu Chang 'an * * * was ordered to pay back the illegal income of RMB 72,, and the defendant Xiao Mou * * * paid back the illegal income of RMB 46,5, all of which were returned to the victim Chen Moujia.

Yu Chang' an, the defendant in the original trial, appealed that (1) in the second section, he didn't go to Zhongxin Car Rental Company to rent a car, but he only provided a guarantee for Jin Shunliang's loan; (2) in the third section, he instructed Ding Mingjun to rent a car because he didn't have a driver's license, so renting a car was convenient for gambling and he didn't plan to use the car as a mortgage; And at the time of borrowing, the victim Chen Moujia was informed that the vehicle was leased, and the interest of 12, yuan for three months had been paid continuously; In addition, the appraisal opinion also overestimated the value of the vehicle. (3) I used my friend Chen Xianhu's identity to rent a car in Zhongxin Company before, and I also introduced my friend to rent a car in this company many times. The purpose of using my identity falsely was not to illegally possess the vehicle. The original sentence was extremely heavy and I asked for a revision.

? Xiaomou, the defendant in the original trial, appealed that renting a car in his true identity, the mortgaged vehicle had been returned by the leasing company, and the car rental fee was not in arrears, which did not cause the owner's loss. When renting a car, there was no illegal possession purpose, and the vehicle value should not be used for conviction and sentencing; The actual loan was only 46,5 yuan. After the loan, I kept in touch with the victim Chen Moujia until Chen took the police to arrest him. The original sentence was extremely heavy and asked for a change of sentence.

the facts and evidence ascertained by the trial of the second instance are consistent with those determined by the judgment of the original trial, and this court confirms them. In the second section, the victim Cai identified Yu Chang 'an as the actual car renter. Although Yu Chang 'an argued that he didn't actually rent a car, even according to his defense, he called the car dealership in the name of "Chen Xianhu" to help Jin Shunliang rent a car through "Ding Mingjun", and then provided a guarantee for Jin Shunliang knowing that Jin Shunliang forged the identity document of the owner Liu and asked the victim Chen Moujia for a mortgage loan. In the third section, the fact that Yu Chang 'an rented a car and went to apply for a mortgage loan that night was confirmed by documentary evidence such as "The Lessee's Situation and Vehicle Handover in settlement book" and "Personal Loan Contract" and the testimony of the owner Cai and the borrower Chen Moujia. Yu Chang 'an also confessed to the fact that he had planned to rent a car with others to raise gambling money during the investigation stage, and his confession that renting a car was just for the convenience of gambling was inconsistent with the facts ascertained, so it was not accepted. Although Yu Chang 'an argued that he had paid the victim Chen Moujia three months' interest, Chen Moujia did not admit it, and Yu Chang 'an could not provide evidence to prove the fact, so he refused to accept the argument. As for the price appraisal opinion, it was made by a qualified price appraisal institution according to legal procedures. Yu Chang 'an had insufficient reasons to object to the appraisal opinion and refused to adopt it.

? Our court believes that the appellants Yu Chang 'an and Xiao Mou, for the purpose of illegal possession, colluded to defraud other people's property, and the amount was huge, both of which constituted the crime of fraud. During the probation period of probation, Xiaomou found that there were other crimes that had not been decided before the verdict was announced, so he should revoke the probation and impose a combined punishment for several crimes. Yu Chang 'an was once sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment for intentional crime, and he intentionally committed the crime that should be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment or more within five years after the execution of the penalty. He is a recidivist and should be severely punished. The original judgment In view of the fact that the stolen cars in this case have been recovered, Xiaomou has a frank plot and has been given a lighter punishment. Yu Chang 'an and Xiao Mou colluded with others in advance, and in order to raise gambling money without the financial ability to repay the car, and Yu Chang 'an faked the identity of the lessee, they used the car as a mortgage loan in the name of the owner, which showed their subjective intention of illegal possession. The other two argued that the opinion that there was no purpose of illegal possession of the car and the amount of crime should be calculated based on the amount of loan was inconsistent with the law and was not adopted. The original judgment and conviction are accurate, the sentencing is appropriate, and the trial procedure is legal. Accordingly, according to Article 225, Paragraph 1 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China and Articles 266, 25, Paragraph 1, 65, Paragraph 3, 77, Paragraph 1, 69 and 64 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, the ruling is as follows:

Reject the appeal and uphold the original judgment.

? This ruling is final.

? Chief adjudicator Wu hai

? Examiner Tu Lingfang < P >? Acting judge Xia Ning 'an

April 22nd, 215

Bookkeeper Zhao Dongqing.