Fan: Criminal complaint.

Appellant (defendant in the original trial): Liu, male, Han nationality, 38 years old, ID number:, junior high school education, from Kaifeng City, Henan Province, and now lives in BuildingNo.. Street compound in Kaifeng City, Henan Province.

The appellant appealed the criminal judgment No.1 of yongcheng city People's Court (20XX) on suspicion of contract fraud.

Appeal request

1. The criminal judgment of yongcheng city People's Court (2009) No.1 of Forever Punishment was revoked.

2. Changing the defendant's sentence does not constitute a crime and will not bear criminal responsibility.

Facts and reasons

First, the appellant's position in this case determines that the appellant has no way of knowing that Henan Culture Investment Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Culture Company) has no ability to perform the contract.

The cultural company was established for the first defendant in this case. When the company was established, the appellant did not know all kinds of materials submitted by Ding to the industrial and commercial registration department and the establishment process of the company. At first, the appellant was just Ding's driver, and later he was sent to Zhengzhou Branch as the deputy manager. According to Ding's instructions, he is engaged in some specific affairs, including various matters concerning the external bidding of cultural companies. The appellant didn't know, so he didn't have a chance to understand the capital operation of the cultural company. Moreover, the appellant has never been engaged in project investment, and his education level is low, so it is impossible to judge whether the cultural company invests in the project. However, the judgment made by yongcheng city People's Court (20XX) with the word "forever" found that it was a factual mistake for the appellant to introduce the victim's construction enterprise to sign a construction contract while knowing that the defendant was incompetent.

Two, the appellant has no subjective purpose of illegal possession, and objectively has no possession of the money of the construction enterprise.

Although the appellant introduced the two companies to sign contracts with cultural companies, the contract performance payments received by the two companies were paid to Ding himself or remitted to the account designated by Ding according to Ding's instructions. Up to now, the appellant has paid more than 60,000 yuan (the evidence has been submitted to the court) to the cultural company, which has not been settled. Objectively speaking, the appellant himself is also the victim of this case, and there is no such thing as possessing the money of the injured enterprise, let alone subjective possession.

To sum up, yongcheng city People's Court (20XX) found that the facts were unclear and the applicable law was wrong, and urged the court of second instance to give the appellant a fair judgment based on the working attitude of seeking truth from facts, being serious and responsible, and investigating any mistakes.

I am here to convey

Shangqiu intermediate people's court

Appellant: Liu.

Attorney: Chen Kui.

20xx165438+1October 27th

Fan: Civil appeal.

Appellant (plaintiff in the original trial): Wang, male,196065438+born on February 8th, Han nationality, manager of Jinan Runheng Technology Development Co., Ltd., living in Room 2204, Block D, No.3966, Second Ring East Road, Jinan.

Appellee (defendant of first instance): a real estate company in Shandong.

Address: No.33 Qijia Village, Lixia District, Jinan

Legal Representative: Deng Moumou. Title: Chairman of the Board of Directors

The appellant Wang refused to accept the civil judgment of (2008) Licheng Civil and Commercial ChuziNo.. The people's court of Licheng District, Jinan made a decision on June 65438+1October 2 1 50, and now appeals.

Appeal request:

1. Request the people's court to cancel the judgment of first instance and change the judgment according to law.

2. The litigation costs in this case shall be borne by the Appellee.

Facts and reasons:

1. The court of first instance held that the appellant's request for the appellee to pay the liquidated damages and increase the liquidated damages was unfounded on the grounds that the original and the defendant only agreed to return the overdue registration fee in the contract, but did not agree to pay the liquidated damages, and the application of the law was wrong and it was suspected of perverting the law.

The indisputable fact of this case is that the appellee has seriously violated the commercial housing sales contract with the appellee, and failed to report the information required by the seller to register the ownership of the commercial housing to the property rights registration authority for the record within 360 working days after the delivery of the commercial housing, resulting in the appellee's property right certificate not being handled normally within the agreed time limit, and the appellee should bear the liability for breach of contract for handling the property right certificate after the deadline.

Article 15 of the Commercial House Sales Contract signed by the Appellant and the Appellee on May 26th, 2005 stipulates that the seller shall submit the information required by the seller to the property right registration authority for filing within 360 working days after the commercial house is delivered for use. If the Buyer fails to obtain the property ownership certificate within the specified time limit due to the Seller's responsibility, both parties agree to handle it according to the following item 1:

1. If the buyer cancels the house purchase, the seller shall return the paid-up house price to the buyer within 30 days upon the buyer's request for canceling the house purchase, and compensate the buyer for the loss according to 0.5% of the paid-up house price.

2. If the buyer refuses to return the house, the seller shall pay the buyer 0.5% of the paid house price as penalty.

According to this clause of the contract, if the appellee's license period is violated, the appellant has the right to choose to return the house, but it cannot be considered that this clause gives the defaulting party the right to take back the house after the breach.

That is to say, when the appellee breaches the contract and the appellant doesn't want to exercise the right to return a house, there is no agreement in the contract on how the defaulting party should bear the liability for breach of contract. Legal provisions can only be made if there is no agreement between the two parties to the contract. Article 18 of the Judicial Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Trial of Disputes over Commercial Housing Sales Contracts does not stipulate liquidated damages or the amount of losses is difficult to determine. It can be calculated according to the total amount of the paid house purchase, with reference to the standard for financial institutions to collect overdue loan interest stipulated by the People's Bank of China. According to the above-mentioned legal provisions, in the case that the appellant chooses not to return the house, he claims to refer to the calculation standard of liquidated damages in the second paragraph of Article 15 of the contract and request to increase the liquidated damages, which has a clear legal basis. The court of first instance dismissed the lawsuit, saying that the contract only stipulated that the house should be returned without paying the penalty, which was obviously a misjudgment and violated the relevant provisions of the Contract Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Judicial Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Trial of Disputes over Commercial Housing Sales Contracts.

Two, the court of first instance did not find out some of the main facts of the case.

1. The delivery time of the disputed house has not yet been determined.

2. The payment time of the disputed house maintenance fund has not been ascertained.

3. The time for handling the property right certificate of Jinan Donghuan International Plaza developed and constructed by the appellee in dispute has not been ascertained.

3. The court of first instance "confirmed that the defendant paid the money on July 196, 2007" in the fourth line of page 5 of the judgment. The expression is inexplicable. If it is a clerical error, it should be corrected in time to maintain the seriousness of legal documents.

Four. The appellant's appeal is to ask the court to order the appellee to handle the property transfer formalities at Room 220 1~2204, Block D, No.3966, Second Ring Road, Jinan within 30 days, but the court of first instance ruled that the appellee was restricted from assisting in the formalities within 90 days after the judgment came into effect. Since the appellee has met the requirements for handling the permit, why not sentence him to assist in handling it within 30 days?

To sum up, the appellee obviously breached the contract, which greatly damaged the appellant's contractual rights and interests. In this case, the court of first instance ruled that the appellee did not bear any liability for breach of contract, connived at the defaulting party and ignored the legitimate civil rights and interests of the weak, which obviously violated the principles of fairness and good faith of the law and harmed the legitimate rights and interests of the parties. In order to correctly apply the law, safeguard the dignity of the law and safeguard the appellant's legitimate rights and interests, the court of second instance is requested to revise the case according to law.

I am here to convey

Ji 'nan Intermediate People's Court

Appellant: Wang (handprint signature)

November 3rd, two thousand, ? xx

Fan Wensan: Request for divorce.

Civil appeal

Appellant: XXX (specify name, gender, age, nationality, place of origin, occupation or work unit, position, address and telephone number).

Authorized Agent: XXX (specify name, gender, age, nationality, native place, occupation or work unit, position, address and telephone number).

Appellee: XXX (specify name, gender, age, nationality, native place, occupation or work unit, position, address and telephone number).

The appellant refused to accept the judgment made by the court on _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.

Appeal request:

(including the request for cancellation or partial change of the original judgment).

Facts and reasons:

(It shall comprehensively state the facts and reasons on which the people's court of first instance found the facts and applied the law inappropriately or wrongly, as well as the violation of the procedure, including the facts, reasons and evidence not provided in the procedure of first instance).

Zhezhi

_ _ _ _ People's Court

Appellant: _ _ _ _ _ _ (signature or seal)

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Attachment: 1, and _ _ copies of this appeal.

2._ _ _ copies of certification materials.

It should be noted that the appeal of divorce is mainly aimed at the original judge, not at the other party; The civil complaint is completely unreasonable against the other party, which is the fundamental difference between the appeal and the complaint in writing.