Red Star exclusive ｜ The mysterious "disappear" of the mysterious "disappearance" of the eighty -year -old people?

A huge consumption expenditure of over million yuan was not discovered until nearly two years later? In December 2020, Xiao Lao, who was nearly, discovered that the bank savings card had a 101,5700 yuan expenditure. The payee of this expenditure was a furniture square in Tiedong District, Anshan. Xiao Lao said that the transaction was not what he did, and he had never entrusted others to use the case to apply for the access to the deposit card, and even the savings card never passed the electronic payment function.

In order to recover the huge sums of "disappearing" of the mysterious "disappearance", Xiao Lao will open an account -Beijing Wusheng Road Sub -branch of China Construction Bank to the court. In the second trial, the Beijing Financial Court held that Xiao Lao advocated that the bank card involved in the case was stolen and preliminary evidence should be provided to prove it, but Xiao Lao did not submit any evidence that the bank card department was stolen in the case of the bank card. The public security organs have not been reported to Xiao Lao's case, that is, when the so -called stolen brush is not identified by criminal judicial procedures, Xiao Lao did not provide evidence to prove that the real card was not on the trading place when the transaction occurred, and it did not provide it at the Wusheng Road Sub -branch of the Construction Bank. Send the transaction to prompt evidence of the alarm or loss within a reasonable time after the SMS. The court of first instance believes that it is not inappropriate to confirm that the transaction involved is not the operation of the old man. The judgment of the first instance determines that the facts are clear, the applicable law is correct, and the original judgment is maintained.

▲ Details involved in the case

Carry million yuan "disappear"?

The eighty old man said he was not taken by himself

Xiao Lao's entrusted attorney Lin Xiaojian introduced that Xiao Lao opened a bank card at the CCB Wusheng Road Sub -branch near his residence many years ago. In recent years, the card has been used for deposits, wealth management, and transactions.

In 2019, Xiao Lao suffered from cancer. In December 2020, the condition recurred, and a large amount of funds were used to treat. Xiao Lao believed that there was a regular deposit in the bank card expired. When he took the money, he found that the balance in the bank card was inconsistent with the memory.

Mr. Yang was a colleague before Xiao Lao's retirement. He accompanied Xiao Lao to the bank to withdraw money that day. Mr. Yang recalled: "The bank said that you are not regular. He (Xiao Lao) said that I had a regular period. The bank said no. He (Xiao Lao) said you played the bill for me. The old man discovered the money. Gone."

Mr. Yang introduced that after Xiao Lao got the bill and found that the money was wrong, he reported the police at the bank and then went to the police station to register.

The bank flow shows that on January 27, 2019, Xiao Lao's own name was 1164 Construction Bank savings card. There was a 101,5700 yuan expenditure. The account number is 1547.

Xiao Lao said that this transaction was not what he did. He had never been to Anshan for consumption at that time, nor did he entrusts any third party to use the savings card to handle the access to the deposit. Payment function.

Lin Xiaojian said that since then, Xiao Lao has been repeatedly communicated with the bank, but the CCB Wusheng Road Sub -branch did not tell the expenditure method of the money, the specific bank of the payment party, and the actual operator. Data and signature requests did not agree. As a result, Xiao Lao complained to the court in June 2021 and asked to return the deposit and pay the corresponding interest of 101,5700 yuan.

Evidence shows that after the transaction involved in the case,

Bank cards have been used normally

In October 2021, the trial of the first instance.

The evidence of this case shows that Xiao Lao transferred 50216 yuan on January 26, 2019, with ATM withdrawal of 5,000 yuan each, and the balance of 1028758.89 yuan on the day. At 9 am on January 27, 2019, the dispute transaction involved in the case occurred. There was a expenditure of 101,5700 yuan. The payer was a furniture square in Tiedong District, Anshan City, with a receipt account of 1547. After the expenditure, Xiao Lao's savings card balance was 13058.89 yuan, and the account was still used normally. There were multiple deposits, transfer and consumption records.

The plaintiff said that Xiao Lao himself never left Beijing and did not grant bank cards to others. Small tickets before and after the "stolen brush" time prove that Xiao has been in Beijing during the period, and the bank card has been in my hands, there is no leakage deposit information and password behavior. The defendant (bank) could not discover and stop the harm in time for illegal infringement from the outside, which led the plaintiff to damage the interests of households as a store. At the same time, the plaintiff did not open the electronic payment function at the defendant (bank). In addition, when the plaintiff discovered that the balance was abnormal, the defendant did not provide evidence of monitoring videos, trading documents such as monitoring and trading documents involved in the case proved that the detailed situation of the expenditure shall bear the legal consequences of the proof.

The defendant's defense of CCB Wusheng Road Sub -branch stated that from the perspective of cross -bank consumer transactions, Xiao Lao knew and knowing such transactions and had similar transactions before and after the transaction. From the perspective of the transaction time, the case involved in the case occurred in the transaction time. At about 9 am, it is consistent with Xiao Lao's daily transactions and consumption habits at other times; from the perspective of space, the trading contributor involved in the transaction is a merchant in Anshan City, Liaoning Province. The location involves Shandong, Ningxia and other places, and has traded in different places; from the appearance, for nearly two years after the transaction involved in the case, Xiao Lao has been using the bank card involved in the case normally. The loss or reporting case does not meet the response of ordinary people's encounters ... Therefore, the transaction involved in the transaction of Xiao Lao himself or its authorization of others.

In November 2021, the case was sentenced in the first instance and rejected Xiao Lao's lawsuit.

The Chaoyang District Court of Beijing believes that in this case, according to the bank details submitted by the CCB Wusheng Road Sub -branch, the transaction amount involved in the case is huge, and before and after the transaction, there are many transactions in the bank card involved. Xiao Lao sent a text message to remind that Xiao Lao advocated that the transaction involved in the case was not his own operation, but he did not submit any preliminary evidence to prove it. Support. Xiao Lao did not accept the judgment of the first instance. He believed that he had no ability and had no channels to provide detailed records to prove that his bank card was stolen by others, and he should not bear the legal consequences that could not be proof. Since then, he appealed to the Beijing Financial Court.

The bank has issued a transaction SMS reminder

The court of the second instance determined that the adverse consequences should be borne by it

According to the evidence submitted by the parties in the first instance, the specific time of the transaction involved was 9:16 38 seconds on January 27, 2019. At 9:16 and 54 seconds on that day, the Wusheng Road Sub -branch of the Construction Bank sent a SMS message involved in the case of Xiao Lao. . The balance of life is 13058.89 yuan. "

Xiao Lao recognized the text messages sent by the bank to him, but said that the mobile phone it used was an old machine, which caused the transaction to prompt SMS without seeing the functional restrictions.

On May 31, 2022, the Beijing Financial Court believed that Xiao Lao advocated that the bank card involved in the case was stolen and it should provide preliminary evidence to prove it, but Xiao Lao did not submit any evidence that the bank card department was stolen in the case of the bank card involved. Especially when the public security organs have not been given the case of Xiao Lao's report, that is, the so -called stolen facts have not been identified by criminal judicial procedures, Xiao Lao did not provide evidence to prove that the real card was not in the trading place when the transaction occurred, and it did not provide him at the Construction Bank martial arts. The Shenglu Sub -branch sends the transaction to prompt the evidence of the alarm or loss within the reasonable time after the SMS. The court of first instance believes that it is not inappropriate to confirm that the transaction involved is not the operation of the old man. The judgment of the first instance determines that the facts are clear, the applicable law is correct, and the original judgment is maintained.

The verdict also wrote that Xiao Lao advocated that the functional restrictions on the elderly caused a SMS message that he did not see the transaction prompts, but his claim was contrary to the common sense of life and did not provide evidence to prove that the court was difficult to accept it. Even though Xiao Lao claims to be true, it is still caused by his own reasons that he did not check the SMS in time. Therefore, the adverse consequences of the unable to keep the evidence in time after the transaction occurred, and Xiao Lao should be borne by himself.

After receiving the verdict, Xiao Lao's acting lawyer Lin Xiaojian stated to Hongxing that during the court trial, Xiao Lao proposed that when the CCB provided the use of information such as the use of bank cards, monitoring videos during transfer After completing, I sent a reminder message to Xiao Lao. But Xiao Lao was nearly 80 years old at the time, and he was not good at his body. He didn't know how to view the text message. After in the past two years, I found that "stealing brush" then looked back at the SMS, and found that the phone only retained the last five text messages, and could not verify whether the bank reminded him.

Lin Xiaojian believes that even if the bank sent a text message to Xiao Lao at that time, it was sent after the stolen brush was completed. "With such a large amount of transfers, can I send a text message to prove that the bank has fulfilled the obligations of security and guarantee for the funds of the households?"

For this matter, Red Star reporter recently called the Beijing Wusheng Road Sub -branch of China Construction Bank, and the staff of the bank recorded the problem. Since then, the staff of the bank responded to the reporter that the results of the second instance have come out and the bank respects the court's judgment.

According to the court's judgment content, Xiao Lao had previously reported the case to the public security organs, but the police did not establish the case. A few days ago, the Red Star reporter contacted the police station of Jinsong Police Station, Beijing Chaoyang District, Beijing, who received the police on the day of Xiao Lao. The police officer said it was unclear and could not be interviewed.

Red Star reporter once called a furniture square of the huge consumer expenditure -a furniture square in Tiedong District, Anshan City. The office staff said that he did not understand the relevant situation at the time.

Expert saying:

Banks such as the elderly and other special groups should bear more attention obligations

Regarding the case, Liu Zhimin, a senior lawyer of Beijing Jingshi Law Firm, believes that Xiao Lao's bank card should be stolen.

Liu Zhimin said that Xiao Lao's bank card has some functions such as consumer payment, credit loan, transfer settlement, and access to cash, and can be identified as a credit card in the sense of criminal law. In this case, if Xiao Lao stated that it is true, the possibility of others for pseudo Xiao Lao's bank card for stealing consumption is relatively high. Although Xiao Lao only discovered the abnormal transaction in the past two years, the amount involved in the case had reached 1 million yuan, which was a "particularly huge amount". The public security organs should be investigated. If the public security organs make a decision that is not given a case, Xiao Lao can apply to the procuratorate, and the procuratorate shall ask the public security organs to explain the reason for the case. If the people's procuratorate believes that the public security organs do not file a case cannot be established, the public security organs shall notify the public security organs, and the public security organs shall be filed after receiving the notice.

Liu Zhimin said that if Xiao Lao knew the case reported and completed by his relatives and relatives, he constituted a common fraud crime; if he did not know, the perpetrator constituted a crime.

Liu Zhimin said that the parties were nearly 80 years old at the time of the incident, and the amount of one -time transfer was so huge, and banks should have more attention obligations.For example, to verify whether the transaction is true by telephone, to determine whether it is traded by signing.Peng Xinlin, a professor at the School of Law of Beijing Normal University, said that special groups such as the elderly should strengthen their awareness of self -prevention, keep the money bags, and do not just set the bank card password for the convenience of memory settings.Prevent people with ingenuity.In addition, once the funds of special groups such as the elderly are illegally infringed, the bank should also provide active assistance to the reporting case and cooperate with the public security organs to solve the case.

Red Star News reporter Zhang Yanliang

Editor Guan Li

- END -