Remarks in the original remarks of the text when the evidence submitting behavior belongs to forged evidence materials

Summary

In the lawsuit, the participants should adhere to the principle of honesty and trust. In this case, the parties added remarks to the original in order to win the prosecution purpose, and submitted it to the court of first instance as evidence. The fact has been verified by the original court. The above -mentioned behavior of the parties belongs to forgery of evidence, which hinders the people's court's trial of the case, and sanctions should be performed in accordance with the law.

Referee

The Supreme People's Court of the People's Republic of China

Reconsideration decision

(2022) The Supreme Law Division punished No. 9

Review applicant: Yunnan Tianxiang Network Technology Co., Ltd., residential place in the export processing area of ​​Kunming Economic Economic Development Zone in Yunnan Province Essence

Reconsideration applicants Yunnan Tianxiang Network Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Tianxiang Company) refused to accept the (2021) Yunji penalty decision on December 22, 2021, and applied for reconsideration from our court.

Tianxiang Company proposed that (2017) Yun 01 China Chu No. 1634 case was filed through the Kunming Intermediate People's Court on July 21, 2017. The former and the defendant are both companies. 2. (2021) The case of Yunmin No. 1468 is a natural person Zheng Yichun and Luo Jianhua sued Tianxiang Company. The two cases are different cases and different evidence. There is no problem of the Tianxiang Company that the Yunnan Higher People's Court considers the problem of adding text on the card of the card. Tianxiang Company did not falsify evidence, and there was no behavior that hindered the people's court trial.

The court's review believes that the participants in the lawsuit shall adhere to the principle of honesty and trust in the litigation activities. In this case, in order to win the prosecution, Tianxiang Company added remarks on the original, and submitted to the court of first instance as evidence. The fact has been verified by the original court. The above behavior of Tianxiang Company belongs to forgery of evidence, which hinders the people's court's trial of the case and should be sanctioned according to law. The decision of the Yunnan Higher People's Court complies with the law.

In accordance with the provisions of Article 114, paragraph 1, paragraph 1 and 119 of Article 114 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, the decision is as follows:

Rejected the application for reconsideration of Yunnan Tianxiang Network Technology Co., Ltd. to maintain the original decision.

Once this decision is made, it will take effect.

May 12, 2002

Source: Qilu family affairs, legal houses

- END -