He has descended a huge debt, and he is afraid of being in prison.

"Finally let go of the burden and can operate the enterprise with peace of mind. For more than a month, the efficiency of the company has gradually improved ..." On September 16, Liu Yanjie, prosecutor of the Zhengzhou District Procuratorate of Henan Free Trade Zone, made a telephone return visit to the case he handled. At that time, the director of the private enterprise told him the good news of the recent development of the company. Hearing Renmou's feedback, Liu Yanjie was quite pleased.

Skyfall Giant Debt

Fear of getting caught in prison for help

In December 2019, Ren applied to the procuratorate for supervision on the grounds that he had misrepresed a decision with a financial institution's borrowing contract.

The case shows that in June 2014, a financial institution signed a loan contract with Company A with a loan period of 6 months. The financial institution also signed a guarantee contract with Company B, C Company, Fan, and Renmou, which agreed that the guarantor provided the highest guarantee for a series of claims formed by a financial institution in accordance with the main contract. The joint responsibility guarantee is two years during the guarantee period. After the loan expires, Company A did not repay the loan as agreed, and a financial institution filed a lawsuit in June 2016, requiring Company A to repay 7.6 million yuan in loan principal, corresponding interest and lawyer fees, and required Company B, C. C The company, Fan Mou, and Ren Mou assumed the liability for liquidation. The court judged that a litigation request of a financial institution was supported.

After learning that the court's verdict was learned, Ren was covered with a whole person, and he had never provided a guarantee for Company A. How could there be such a large consecutive debt? What was even more anxious was that he was faced with prison in prison for his refusal to perform his verdict and was suspected of refusing to implement the judgment. In order to recover justice for himself, Ren came to the procuratorate for help.

Suspected cloud

Prosecutor checked clues carefully

After careful review of the case, the prosecutor found that the case was heavy: First, the relevant audit materials in the dossier showed that Renmou provided a guarantee as a natural person, but how could his ID card copy the official seal of Company D? The loan involved in the case has nothing to do with company D. Second, how can the handwriting signed by the guarantor signed in the contract and the handwriting content of the identity card number and date of the guarantor obviously inconsistent?

When he learned about the case from a financial institution and other guarantors, the prosecutor found another doubt: the guarantee contract signed by a financial institution to the procuratorate was not the same as the guarantee contract signed with Company C. Why is the contract in the hands of one side? According to the daily signing habits, the contract text shall be held by the parties. When the prosecutor knew the situation to the legal representative of the C company, Lu Mou said that the signature of Company C on the guarantee contract was not written by himself. He did not know what company C was guaranteed by company C and requested a handwriting identification. In order to further restore the facts, the prosecutor also conducted a multi -party investigation and verification.

Cocoon

Facts surface

"If it wasn't for the Executive Bureau, I didn't know that I had carried more than 9 million yuan in debt!" Renmou recalled that he had signed 3 gaps with a financial institution as a legal representative of company D with a financial institution. The guarantee contract, but has not provided a guarantee for Company A, and he has never received any legal documents on the case before.

Subsequently, the prosecutor contacted a financial institution. Because the relevant salesman had left, the prosecutor failed to understand the specific situation of the guarantee of the case at that time. However, the prosecutor noticed that when a financial institution knew the telephone number of the borrower and the guarantor, the court did not indicate that the recipient's contact phone number was not indicated when they were mailing. In the case of delivery, the announcement was issued, which failed to fully protect the parties' litigation rights. Renmou and other defendants were absent from the first trial.

The prosecutor repeatedly reviewed the materials provided by the case and the parties, and visited the relevant parties and the relevant institutions of the investigation. The certification standards and the situation of not being able to fully protect the parties' litigation rights, etc. This case meets the supervision conditions. On June 8, 2020, the procuratorial organs issued retrial procuratorial suggestions to the court of first instance. The court adopted and ruled the case on June 19, 2020.

Rejected the original judgment

Revitalize the company

"Prosecutor, I'm really embarrassed, I came to disturb you again ... I was so panicked in my heart, I couldn't sleep at night, do you say I can win this time?"

"Don't worry too much, the evidence you should provide provides all of the evidence. If you don't understand, call us at any time, we must help you answer."

During the retrial of the case, the dialogue did not know how many times it happened. Facing Renmou's concerns and confusion, the prosecutor always appeased patiently and answered carefully.

On October 29, 2020, the court of first instance made a ruling that the original trial judgment had the fact that the facts were unclear and the procedures were illegal, and the original civil judgment made in 2016 was canceled. A financial institution appealed to the Zhengzhou Intermediate Court.

Because the facts of the relevant cases have not been found, in the past two years, the case has experienced two rounds of trial between the Zhengzhou Intermediate Court and the first instance court.On July 11 this year, after many trials in the case, Zhengzhou Intermediate Court made a final judgment. Based on whether Ren provided a guarantee for 7.6 million yuan in borrowing, it was in a state of authenticity.Effective evidence proves the facts, so the legal consequences of the fact that they claim to be undertaken by the facts of the proof, the court's decision that Renmou will no longer assume the liability for liability and settlement."The lawsuit finally won! I sincerely thank the prosecutor for paying. Without your help, I can live in the future ..." After learning the verdict, Ren Mou calledEssence"This is what we should do. The days are still growing, let's do it with peace of mind!" The prosecutor responded.

(Source: Procuratorial Daily Author: Liu Lixin Zhang Xiran Liu Yanjie)

- END -