The division of property during divorce is a very complicated matter. We will not discuss the verification of property here. We will only briefly classify some methods and principles of property distribution from a legal perspective.

First of all, my country's marriage law implements a marital property system based on the joint property system of husband and wife, supplemented by the husband and wife's unique property system and the husband and wife agreed property system. The agreement shall follow the law. Therefore, in the absence of special agreement, the property acquired by the husband and wife during the period of living together is generally the property of the husband and wife, and in principle, each party will share half of it upon divorce. The property owned by one spouse before marriage will not be converted into the joint property of the spouses due to the continuation of the marriage relationship (unless otherwise agreed by the parties). For couples who have property, when they divorce, the following classification instructions are given:

1. For real estate, the acquisition time of the real estate is based on the time stated in the real estate certificate in practice. Before the marriage is registered, it is generally personal property (unless otherwise agreed between the husband and wife). After the marriage is registered, it is generally the joint property of the husband and wife (unless there is evidence to prove that it was purchased entirely by one party with pre-marital property). A house donated by parents before both parties get married is considered pre-marital property. A house donated by parents after both parties get married, if there is no special evidence (notarial certificate) to prove that it was donated to one party, is joint property of the couple. If the house owned by one party before the marriage is demolished after the marriage, the resettlement house obtained by the demolition is generally personal property. In addition, the housing provident fund actually obtained or supposed to be obtained by both men and women during the marriage relationship is the joint property of the husband and wife (housing subsidies, pension insurance, etc. obtained during the marriage relationship are also the joint property of the husband and wife).

If the house where both parties live is the personal property of one party before marriage or the house that is agreed to be owned by one party after marriage, it will still be owned by that party in the event of divorce. If the other party does not have a house to live in at the time of divorce, he or she can stay temporarily for less than two years or the party with the property rights of the house can provide him with one-time financial assistance for renting a house. The party who receives the house should pay the other party a compensation equal to half of the value of the house (based on the market appraisal price at the time of divorce). When the conditions of both parties are equal, the woman should be taken care of.

2. Company shares. In a broad sense, company shares held by a couple can be understood as the property owned by the couple. However, from the perspective of company law, company shares belong to the company's property. When the couple divorces, they can negotiate through negotiation. One party will receive all the company shares owned by the couple, and the other party will receive the other property owned by the couple. When a couple divorces, there are two situations in which the proportion of the original shares held by the couple in the company is changed. One situation is that both spouses are shareholders of the company, and the proportion of shareholdings needs to be adjusted during divorce. Another situation is that only one of the spouses participates as a shareholder in the name, and the spouses divide the company shares in the event of divorce. In these two cases, the disposal of company shares is not only a matter of equity distribution within the couple, but also involves the rights and interests of all other shareholders of the company. The former situation is a share transfer between shareholders of the company, and the shares can be changed by consensus between the husband and wife. In the latter case, the transfer of shares to persons other than shareholders requires the consent of a majority of all shareholders according to the Company Law. Other shareholders are subject to conditional restrictions in the company law when exercising their veto power on share transfers. If the shares of a couple cannot be divided because other shareholders do not agree, the shareholders who do not agree to the division should purchase the shares divided between the couple due to divorce and those who are not shareholders of the company. The shares of either spouse, otherwise it is deemed to have agreed to the transfer (division) of the company's shares.

When the couple divorces and cannot agree on the division of company shares. There are several treatment options available. (1) Divide the company's shares to the party who is actually in charge of the company's operations, and give the other party a compensation equivalent to the company's share consideration when the other spouse's property is divided. (This option cannot be adopted when the value of the company shares held by the couple is greater than the total value of the couple’s other joint property). But the assessment of the market price of the shares here is a very difficult matter. (2) After the couple divorces, each becomes a shareholder of the company and holds shares in the company. However, the original share ratio should be reviewed and adjusted when the shares are divided. During the succession of a couple, the setting of the ratio of the couple's shares is often just a formal requirement and does not reflect the distribution of the couple's actual rights and interests. One spouse often holds most or even all of the company's shares in his or her name. In the event of divorce, the shares owned by the couple should be divided according to the principle of each party receiving half, and the company's equity structure should be adjusted accordingly. If you own shares in multiple companies, the shares held by each company should be divided in half according to the aforementioned principles. (3) If one of the spouses is not originally a shareholder of the company, the opinions of other shareholders can be sought before the shares of the couple are divided, or the shares of the couple can be divided first without soliciting the opinions of other shareholders. When other shareholders do not agree to the division (transfer) of the company's shares to a spouse other than the shareholder, the shareholder who does not agree to the division (transfer) should purchase the shares of the spouse who is not a shareholder. The proceeds from the sale and purchase of the shares belong to the party that did not acquire the shares. If other shareholders do not purchase the shares, they shall be deemed to have agreed to the division (transfer). (4) Liquidate the company or auction the company, and the remaining assets after liquidation or proceeds from the auction will be divided as the joint property of the couple. This option has minimal sequelae, but is limited to companies with only a husband and wife as shareholders. This plan will affect the company's accumulated marketing network and other intangible assets as well as the couple's respective development in the business world after the divorce. Therefore, the adoption of this plan should fully consider the opinions of both parties.

No matter how the division is divided, shareholders of the company who receive company shares due to divorce should attach great importance to the understanding and application of the company's operations and company law, so as to protect their own shareholder rights.

3. Intellectual property rights. During the marriage, the intellectual property rights acquired by one party cannot be separated from the support of the other spouse. The economic benefits that have been realized should undoubtedly be divided according to the marital property.

We think it cannot be generalized whether intellectual achievements completed before marriage and economic benefits obtained after marriage can be regarded as joint property. It is necessary to distinguish between different situations and handle them: 1. When intellectual achievements, such as copyrights, have been created and published before the marriage, one party only receives the royalties after the marriage. In this case, it should be regarded as pre-marital property. Because once the pre-marriage work is published, the property rights are acquired, which is a vested property right. It is only actually acquired after the marriage, so it does not affect the nature of the pre-marriage property. 2. When an intellectual achievement is created before marriage, such as an invention, it is not transferred or put into the market due to various reasons, but is put into the market after marriage. In this case, we usually believe that in principle it should not be regarded as the joint property of husband and wife, but the economic interests in intellectual property rights are acquired over a long period of time after marriage, and the other party has contributed to the acquisition of economic interests. Those who work can be allocated appropriate property.

The Supreme Court stipulated that intellectual property rights that one party has not obtained economic benefits at the time of divorce shall be owned by one party. It also stipulated that when dividing the joint property of husband and wife, the other party may be given appropriate compensation according to the specific circumstances. take care of. We think this is inappropriate and should be defined as separate property. During the division, the method of discount compensation or retaining the other party's right to sue can be adopted (dividing will be carried out when the actual benefits are obtained in the future).

4. Inheritance, when the property inherited before marriage is actually acquired after marriage, if the other party has not contributed any labor to obtain the inherited property, the inherited property shall be regarded as personal property, and one spouse shall have right to give up inheritance rights.

5. Stocks and pre-marital stocks have achieved a large increase in value after marriage, but if one party cannot prove that all the increase in value was brought about by the pre-marital stocks, the increased value shall be regarded as joint property.

6. When special items are of high value and account for a large proportion of the couple’s property, they cannot simply be regarded as the personal property of one party. The other party’s share or proportion should be given due consideration.

Finally, let’s briefly talk about the crime of bigamy. Bigamy is a serious fault (the fault of one spouse leads to less or no division of property in a divorce), and even a criminal act. However, in practice, It is difficult to identify the crime of bigamy. Article 258 of my country's Criminal Law stipulates: "Whoever has a spouse and commits bigamy, or who knowingly marries another person who has a spouse, shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than two years or criminal detention." The Supreme People's Court On December 14, 1994, the “Reply on Whether Bigamy Cases in which Bigamy Cases Cohabiting in the Name of Husband and Wife occurred after the Implementation of the Marriage Registration Regulations shall be Convicted and Punished as Bigamy” stipulates: “The new Marriage Registration Regulations (January 1994) Approved by the State Council on the 12th and promulgated by the Ministry of Civil Affairs on February 1, 1994, after the promulgation and implementation, people with a spouse who live together with others as husband and wife should still be convicted and punished as bigamy. The authoritative explanation is: "A person who has a spouse should be understood as a person who has registered a marriage in accordance with the law. For those who first have a de facto marriage, and then register a marriage with another person, and two or more times are de facto marriages, it does not constitute the crime of bigamy according to the law. . The reason why a person who has a spouse and another person living together as husband and wife forms a de facto marriage should be held criminally responsible for bigamy is because the perpetrator cannot be allowed to use de facto marriage to wantonly destroy a legal marriage registered in accordance with the law. ” p>

People with spouses do not live together with others in the name of husband and wife, which shows that this behavior has not yet formed an open challenge to monogamy. It is not appropriate to bring this behavior into the scope of the criminal law and does not constitute the crime of bigamy. In practice, there are situations such as a married man committing adultery and causing the woman to become pregnant. The woman uses this as a threat and resolutely gives birth to the child. If this is the case, it may not be appropriate to be convicted and punished as bigamy. For another example, if the law stipulates that having a spouse and living with another person for more than one year constitutes bigamy, then there is nothing the law can do if you change the person to live with another person in the 11th month. For those who live together, according to the provisions of the current marriage law, the non-fault party can file a lawsuit for damages during divorce and request compensation from the party living with others.