The prosecution alleges that between July 2017 and April 28, 2018, defendant Lu, for the purpose of profit, used WeChat to accept bets on the "Mark Six" lottery from Zhang and Zheng (both dealt with in separate cases) and others, totaling more than 55,000 RMB. During the same period, defendant Hu, for the purpose of profit, used WeChat to accept bets on the "Mark Six" lottery from defendant Lu, totaling more than 55,000 RMB. During the same period, defendant Zhu, for the purpose of profit, used WeChat to accept bets on the "Mark Six" lottery from defendant Hu, totaling more than 65,000 RMB. During the same period, defendant Wang, for the purpose of profit, used WeChat to accept bets on the "Mark Six" lottery from defendant Zhu, totaling more than 65,000 RMB. On April 28, 2018, defendant Lu was apprehended by this city's public security bureau officers; on May 3 of the same year, defendant Hu surrendered to this city's public security bureau and truthfully confessed his criminal conduct; on May 4 of the same year, defendant Zhu was apprehended by this city's public security bureau officers; on August 10 of the same year, defendant Wang surrendered to this city's public security bureau and truthfully confessed his criminal conduct. The aforementioned facts were not disputed by defendants Lu, Hu, Zhu, and Wang during the court hearing process, and are corroborated by evidence such as the document of seizure, records of apprehensions, incident reports, personal information, testimonies of witnesses Zhang and Zheng, and identification records, which are sufficient to establish the facts.


The prosecution alleges: Defendant Li held a grudge against Liu, the head of the department where Li's wife, Lu, worked, because Lu was dismissed by Eurasia Company. Li sought revenge and on December 17, 2012, at approximately 6 p.m., Li gathered defendants Fan, Ye, Wang, and Cao to attack Liu when he entered a garage in a certain district. Afterward, Li and the others fled the scene but returned upon realizing that Fan's phone had been left behind. They again assaulted Liu. An assessment determined Liu's facial injuries to be minor injuries. Following the incident, defendants Li and Fan turned themselves in to the police; furthermore, both parties reached a civil compensation agreement and fulfilled it. During the trial, the five defendants did not dispute these facts, which were corroborated by the confessions and defenses of Li, Fan, Ye, Wang, and Cao; Liu's statement; the testimony of witness Li Yi; the forensic examination report numbered (2012) 364 from a certain county public security bureau; the arrest certificate from a certain county public security bureau; the household registration certificates of Li and Fan, and the population information forms for Ye, Wang, and Cao; and the compensation agreement, all sufficient to establish the claim.


The prosecution alleges that on September 5, 2014, the victim, Yang, was deceived into going to a pyramid scheme location at Building 4, Unit 614, Victory East Road, Victory East New Village, a certain district in a certain city. On September 16, 2014, the victim, Wang, was also deceived into going to the same pyramid scheme location. Subsequently, the defendant Zhao, as the director of this pyramid scheme location, assigned the defendant Liang as Yang's mentor, and both were responsible for restricting the personal freedom of the two victims. Starting from September 16, 2014, Zhao arranged for the defendant Liang to assist the defendant Min in jointly guarding the victim Wang. During this period, the defendant Sheng acted as the caretaker of the pyramid scheme location and was responsible for managing the key to the main door, collaboratively restricting the personal freedom of the two victims. On September 21, 2014, the victim Yang took the opportunity to send a distress signal via a text message to the public security authorities, who promptly uncovered the pyramid scheme organization and rescued the victims Yang and Wang.


The People's Procuratorate of a certain place charged that in the early morning of June 6, 2013, the defendant Cao, under the pretense of demanding a debt of 5,000 yuan, arranged to meet Jiang at a street night market in the district, and invited three others including the defendant Yang to wait there. Around 1 a.m., Jiang arrived at the location, and defendant Cao demanded 47,000 yuan and slapped Jiang's face, then forcibly took Jiang to the "Shihui" hostel near the university in the district. The defendants demanded Jiang repay the money again, and after Jiang refused, they struck his head. Subsequently, defendant Cao instructed three men to forcibly take Jiang to a pond side at Wujiejie Street in the district for a beating, then back to the "Impression Accommodation" hostel room near the university in the district, forcing Jiang to write an IOU for 30,000 yuan, and locked him in the room thereafter. Around 10 a.m., defendants Cao, Yang, and others forcibly took Jiang to pawn the gold necklace he wore unsuccessfully, and then brought him to the "Zhen Yasi" hair salon near a road community on a street in the district. Defendant Yang and others left, and defendant Cao forced Jiang to hand over the necklace and compelled him to rewrite the IOU for 20,000 yuan. Subsequently, police officers arrived after receiving a report and arrested defendant Cao. It was identified that Jiang had minor injuries; the gold necklace was valued at 6,693 yuan and returned after the incident. On September 27, 2013, defendant Yang surrendered at a police station in Jiangxia District, Wuhan City Public Security Bureau. The prosecution provided the following evidence to charge the above facts: 1. Physical evidence (photos); 2. Documentation such as household registration and incident details; 3. Testimonies from witnesses Chen, Wu, Zhang Jia, Wang, and others; 4. Statement from victim Jiang; 5. Confessions and defense from defendants Cao, Yang; 6. Appraisal report; 7. Identification records.


After the trial, it was found that on the evening of July 4, 2015, the defendants Wei, Yin, Zhou, and others had dinner together at Mabang Commercial Street in a certain city. At around 10 p.m. that night, Wei learned that Wang Mouyi, who owed him money, was playing cards in a chess and card room on Xiyuan Road in the district of that city. Wei, along with Yin, Zhou, and others, went to the card room and took Wang Mouyi outside. Zhou and others beat him and then forcibly took him into a car. Wei, Yin, Zhou, and others drove Wang Mouyi to Yuzan Hotel in Pizhou City and detained him there. At around 4 p.m. the next day, Wei and Wang Mouyi were taken inside for investigation by police officers outside the local tax branch office north of the Yundong Police Station of Pizhou City Public Security Bureau. According to the forensic identification by the Pizhou City Public Security Bureau, Wang Mouyi's injuries were classified as minor. On July 9, 2015, the defendant Yin was arrested by police officers from the Yundong Police Station of Pizhou City Public Security Bureau. On August 7 of the same year, defendant Zhou was arrested by local police officers in the Dongbang Xinyuan Community of a certain district in the city, and he was detained that night at the city's first detention center. The defendants Wei, Yin, and Zhou had no objections to the aforementioned facts during the trial. Additionally, the testimonies of witnesses Zhang Mou and Wang Moujia, the statement of the victim Wang Mouyi, the recognition record, the live examination and identification commission, the IOU, the temporary detention certificate, the defendants' criminal responsibility age proof, and the case-solving process provide sufficient evidence for the determination of these facts.


After examination, it was found that around 9 PM on October 30, 2013, defendants Li and Huang went to the entrance of Dongyuan Restaurant on Jiaoyu Middle Road, Yuzhou District, a certain city. Defendant Huang acted as a lookout while defendant Li stole a WY100T-A model two-wheeled motorcycle of the Wuyang brand from a place where Lu had parked it. After their success, the defendants took the motorcycle back to a certain county, where defendant Huang sold it off and the two defendants split the proceeds. According to the city's Price Certification Center, the stolen motorcycle was valued at 5,904 RMB. It was also found that defendant Li truthfully confessed to the theft, not yet known to the police, after being arrested for alleged drug use. Defendant Li committed theft to acquire funds for drug use. It was further found that defendant Li had been sentenced to ten months' imprisonment on March 5, 2009, by the People's Court of Luchuan County for committing a crime, and was released upon completing the sentence on June 3, 2009. The aforementioned facts were not disputed by defendants Li and Huang during trial. They are substantiated by a record of acceptance of the criminal case, details of arrest process and proof of being at large, a site location map, site photos, site identification transcripts, Lu’s inquiry transcript, interrogation transcripts of defendants Li and Huang, household registration certificates, the criminal judgment No. 30 [2009] of the People's Court of Luchuan County, release certificate No. B067 (2009) from Luchuan County Detention Center, and the Price Appraisal Conclusion No. 776 (2013) from the City Price Certification Center, among other evidence, which are sufficient for the determination.


The People's Procuratorate of a certain area charges: In early July 2013, the defendant Wang had a conflict with Sheng over trivial matters. Wang called the defendant Yin to instruct him to find someone to teach Sheng a lesson. Yin contacted the defendants Liu, Zhang, Xu (handled in a separate case), and Gu. On the evening of July 6, 2013, around 10 PM, Wang indicated Sheng's location to Yin. Around 10:30 PM, when Sheng was passing near Xinxian Experimental Middle School, he was beaten by Xu, Zhang, and Gu and was injured on the left middle finger by a dagger wielded by Zhang. Yin and others then drove away. According to an appraisal, Sheng's injuries were classified as minor. To substantiate these charges, the prosecution presented and read the following evidence in court: 1. Confessions and defenses of the defendants Wang, Yin, Liu, Zhang, and Gu; 2. Statement of the victim Sheng; 3. Testimony of the witness Yang; 4. Five documentary evidences; 5. One appraisal opinion: Forensic medical injury appraisal report.


The People's Procuratorate of a certain state's Economic and Technological Development Zone charged: From July 1, 2012, to August 17, 2013, the defendant Xu used No. 101, Building 6, Polan Waterfront and Ithaca International City townhouses in the Economic and Technological Development Zone as operational locations. At the "Mr. Wolf Sports Life Pavilion" Taobao store he operated, he sold shoes that he knew infringed on the registered trademarks of "Converse," "Nike," and "Jordan," and subsequently employed defendants Lou, Lang, and Qian to handle customer service, packaging, and other tasks. The defendant Xu and Lou collectively sold a total of RMB 69,187.26; defendant Lang was involved in sales totaling RMB 37,590.26, and defendant Qian was involved in sales totaling RMB 32,815. On August 26, 2013, the public security authorities summoned the four defendants, and seized 658 pairs of shoes infringing the "Converse," "Nike," "Jordan," and other registered trademarks (valued at RMB 224,792). To prove the above allegations, the public prosecution authority presented at court: complaint materials, a statement of the rights holder's request for confiscation, testimonies of witnesses He, Jiang, Zhang, Chen, and Bai, online shopping records, the Alipay records of the involved online store, records of sales of counterfeit trademark sports shoes, appraisal certificates, price certificates, situation statements, data discs and situation descriptions, physical evidence photos, homepage and transaction pages of the involved online store, as well as the sales page of the seized sports shoes, search warrant, search records and photos, seizure decision documents, seizure lists, statements on the status of seized sports shoes, notifications and lists of evidence retrieval, return lists, business licenses, trademark registration certificates, notarizations, basic information on permanent residents, household registration certificates, case sources, details of the seizure, situation statements, and confessions of defendants Xu, Lou, Lang, and Qian, among other pieces of evidence.


The prosecution charges that on the night of February 23, 2008, defendants Huang, Tan, and Liang, along with co-defendants Mo (currently at large), Huang A (already sentenced), and Wei (already sentenced), conspired to steal sugarcane. They rented a small four-wheel agricultural vehicle to steal 11 tons of sugarcane belonging to Tan Huahua at the foot of Baihu Mountain in the Xinxing Farm; stole another 10 tons of sugarcane from Yao at the east side of the 18-kilometer mark on Liushi Road in the Xinxing Farm; and stole 8 tons of sugarcane west of the same location from Wu. They transported the stolen sugarcane back to their village in three trips for storage, and days later hired another truck to sell the stolen goods in another county, obtaining over 4,900 yuan, which was divided among them and spent. According to the appraisal by the Price Certification Center, the stolen sugarcane was valued at 275 yuan per ton, totaling 7,975 yuan in value. On August 28, 2014, police arrested Huang and Tan; on September 2 of the same year, police arrested Liang. During the trial, the three defendants raised no objections to the above facts, which are corroborated by evidence such as the case registration form, statements from victims Tan Huahua, Wu, and Yao, on-site investigation records, identification transcripts, site maps, site photos, photos of the identified site, a price appraisal report and conclusion notice for the items involved, confessions from defendants Huang, Tan, and Liang, household registration certificates, and records of their arrest, all of which are sufficient to establish the facts.


The People's Procuratorate of a certain area charges that between April and May 2018, the defendant He, without authorization, modified a nail gun into a firearm powered by gunpowder. During this period, the defendant Sun, knowing that He was modifying the firearm, provided him with an old barrel and helped attach the front sight. Later, on October 27, 2018, at around 3:00 PM, when the Great Wall pickup truck with license plate ××× driven by the defendant He (with Sun on board) was traveling near the Gao Liban Town Bridge, it was seized by the police officers on duty from the Keyou Zhongqi Public Security Bureau. They lawfully confiscated the aforementioned modified firearm, 41 lead bullets, and nails loaded with gunpowder from the vehicle. According to the appraisal by the Hulunbuir Public Security Judicial Appraisal Center, the confiscated firearm was identified as a firearm powered by gunpowder. After the defendants He and Sun were brought to justice, they voluntarily and truthfully confessed their crimes. After being informed of the leniency system for confession and acceptance of punishment, and under the witness of duty lawyers Su and Na, they voluntarily signed the "Statement of Confession and Acceptance of Punishment."


The People's Procuratorate of a certain place charged that on the morning of May 3, 2016, the victim, Zhang Mouliang, was driving past the intersection of Jile Street in Liaoyuan Township, Chongzhou City, when the vehicle of the defendants Ni and Chen was temporarily parked in the middle of the road, blocking traffic. The victim, Zhang Mouliang, repeatedly honked the horn, causing dissatisfaction for the two defendants. Defendant Ni took a dagger from the car and slashed the victim's face. After the victim Zhang Mouliang got out of the car and fled, he was chased and beaten with stones and fists by the two defendants, resulting in multiple injuries to Zhang Mouliang's head, face, fingers of the left hand, and waist. The injury was identified as minor. At 9:45 a.m. that day, police officers from the Liaoyuan Police Station of the Chongzhou Public Security Bureau arrived at the scene and apprehended the two defendants. The dagger used by the defendant Ni was identified by the Public Security Management Brigade of the Chongzhou Public Security Bureau as a controlled knife. The aforementioned facts were confirmed as the defendants Ni and Chen raised no objections during the court hearing and voluntarily pleaded guilty. This was confirmed by this court. The case file includes the police case registration form and description of the apprehension of defendants Ni and Chen, the statement of the victim Zhang Mouliang, testimonies from witnesses Jiang Mouqiang and Peng Mouwu, the on-site inspection record, seizure list, the Chongzhou Public Security Bureau's identification of the controlled knife involved in the case, identification photos, injury photos, the forensic identification report on the degree of physical injury from the Chongzhou Public Security Bureau's Forensic Identification Office, as well as the confessions of defendants Ni and Chen and records of previous offenses, all providing sufficient evidence to establish the facts of the case.


The People's Procuratorate of a certain county charged that on September 19, 2015, at about 16:00, Zhou A was riding a two-wheeled electric bike from the Chuanqi Electric Vehicle Factory in the Guta Subdistrict Office of a certain county to the Guangsen Electric Vehicle Factory in the industrial area of the county to exchange goods. While traveling in the middle section of Huashan Road in the industrial area, Zhou A collided with a white unlicensed Citroën car. After the collision, defendants Zhang and Shi got out of the car and had a dispute with Zhou, during which they assaulted Zhou, causing facial injuries and fractures to the nasal bone and frontal process of the maxilla. After an assessment, Zhou's injuries were classified as a second-degree minor injury.

It was further ascertained that on November 27, 2015, the families of defendants Shi and Zhang voluntarily reached a settlement agreement with the victim Zhou as follows: 1. Defendants Shi and Zhang paid a one-time compensation to the victim Zhou totaling 70,000 yuan for medical expenses, lost wages, nursing fees, transportation fees, and emotional damages, which has been fulfilled; 2. The victim Zhou forgave the actions of the two defendants and suggested not pursuing criminal responsibility against them.

The above facts were not disputed by defendants Shi and Zhang during the court proceedings. The evidence included the victim Zhou's statement, testimonies from witnesses Li Jia, Li Yi, Sun, etc., the victim's hospital medical records, identification transcripts, forensic medical assessment on the degree of bodily injury (document number 534, 2015, issued by Ru Public (Criminal) Medical Examination Law), the compensation agreement, the withdrawal statement and receipt issued by the victim, proof of arrest, and household registration proofs of the two defendants, which are sufficient to confirm the allegations.


The prosecution alleges that on October 29, 2017, at approximately 11 a.m., defendants Huang and Qiu conspired and subsequently, defendant Qiu went to the scooter parking area at the entrance of Zhixingtong Education, affiliated with Shuren Middle School in Gulou District, Xuzhou City. Using the scooter key provided by defendant Huang, they stole a white Yadea Zhu Yun model scooter parked there by Cai. They later hid the scooter under an apartment building opposite Minzhu Road Primary School. According to the appraisal, the stolen scooter was valued at 2,960 RMB. At around 8 p.m. that same day, defendants Huang and Qiu were apprehended on the spot by the police while attempting to relocate the scooter from the hiding place. After the incident, the stolen vehicle was recovered by the police and returned to the victim. The abovementioned facts were not contested by defendants Huang and Qiu during the trial. These facts are supported by the victim Cai's statement, the police's case registration form, crime-solving process report, arrest report, identification record, photo identification, the appraisal conclusion of the stolen vehicle's value, a copy of the sales invoice of the stolen vehicle, the seizure order, the list of seized and returned items, audiovisual materials from surveillance, and proof of the defendants' household registration, all of which are sufficient to establish the facts.


After the trial, it was found that Huang, in collaboration with Zhang (both already sentenced), intended to sell their non-marital child, Huang (born on January 26, 2011). On November 21, 2011, Zhang rented the defendant Han's taxi, and Han contacted his brother-in-law Li to help pick up Huang from a certain village in Chibi Town, Chibi City, Hubei Province. On November 26, 2011, during the return trip, defendants Han and Li learned that Huang and Zhang intended to sell the baby. To receive the rental fee, they continued to drive the vehicle, assisting Huang and Zhang in selling the baby to various places, including a certain city in Shandong Province and certain towns. Later, through the introduction of Liu (already sentenced), Huang was sold for 39,000 yuan to a villager named Ai in a certain village of a certain town for upbringing. Subsequently, Huang paid Han and Li 10,000 yuan. On March 26, 2013, defendants Han and Li were arrested by the police from a certain city's Public Security Bureau. Han and Li raised no objections to the above facts during the court proceedings, which are corroborated by the confessions of their accomplices Huang, Zhang, and Liu, testimonies from witnesses such as Zhang, Hu, Liu, and Ai, the birth certificate of Huang, a written note from Huang to Ai, evidence of defendants' age of criminal responsibility, and details of the case investigation and arrest process, all sufficient to confirm the facts.


The prosecution alleges that in the early hours of March 14, 2017, at around 2 AM, the victim, Yang 1, after drinking, got into a verbal altercation with the defendant, Chen, over a lock issue at the entrance of the Maze Entertainment Club in Longshan Town, Longling County. During the altercation, the victim, Yang 1, first punched the defendant, Chen, in the face with his fist. Chen, along with the defendants Yan, Yue (who has been administratively punished), and Liu (who has been administratively punished), then proceeded to punch and kick the victim, Yang 1, knocking him to the ground. After being pulled apart by others present, the defendant, Chen, retrieved an iron tripod from near the Maze Entertainment Club and hit Yang 1 with it. The defendant, Yan, picked up a hollow pipe that had fallen from the tripod and continued to strike Yang 1, resulting in injuries to Yang 1's face and the back of his head. According to the forensic assessment by the Longling County Police Forensic Center in Yunnan Province, the degree of injury sustained by the victim, Yang 1, was classified as minor injury level two. After the incident, the families of the defendants, Chen and Yan, actively compensated the victim, Yang 1, for his losses and obtained his forgiveness. The aforementioned facts were not disputed by the defendants, Chen and Yan, during the court hearing. Additionally, there is physical evidence, including one iron tripod and one iron hollow pipe; documentary evidence such as household registration proof, capture process, criminal judgment, evidence receipt list, return receipt, and receipts, application, explanation of circumstances, administrative penalty decision, mediation agreement, letter of forgiveness, receipt; testimonies from witnesses Yue, Liu, Mu, Shi, Zhou, Yang 2, Zhao, and Qiu; the victim Yang 1's statement; confessions and defenses from the defendants, Chen and Yan; the forensic assessment report No. [2017] 27 issued by the Forensic Center of Longling County, Yunnan Province; identification records, site inspection records, seizure records, photos of physical evidence, photos of the victim Yang 1's injuries, personal examination records, urine test report; audio-visual materials, among other evidence, sufficient to establish the case.


The prosecution alleges that at around 8:40 on June 21, 2014, defendant Zhao, in collusion with defendant Liu, went to the front of a certain supermarket on a certain road in Lingshan Town, Jimo City. Zhao committed theft while Liu acted as a lookout, and they stole a gray two-wheeled Haojue motorcycle belonging to the victim, Wu, which was parked in front of the supermarket. Zhao later sold the stolen goods and squandered the proceeds. According to an appraisal, the value of the involved two-wheeled motorcycle is 2,470 RMB.


The People's Procuratorate of a certain area charged that from September to October 20, 2015, defendants Liu and Li jointly operated a sign processing workshop behind No. 31 Xiyanghuang, Linqu, Kunyang Town, Pingyang County. Defendant Liu was responsible for acquiring business and providing the workshop and processing equipment, while defendant Li carried out the technical operations. They discharged wastewater generated during the sign cleaning process directly outside, which was later discovered by the environmental protection department. Testing showed that the concentration of heavy metal copper at the discharge outlet of the sign processing workshop reached 16mg/L, exceeding the discharge standard by more than three times. After the incident, defendants Liu and Li surrendered to the public security authorities on October 27 and October 20, 2015, respectively. The above facts were not disputed by defendants Liu and Li during the trial, and were confirmed by evidence such as the test report, on-site inspection records, identification records, the list of extracted evidence, identity information, and the process of surrendering, which are sufficient to establish the case.


The prosecution alleges: 1. At around 2 a.m. on May 29, 2013, defendants Chen and Qiu, along with Zhang and Lin (handled in a separate case), went to the "Cotton Fabric Market" Phase I in a certain district of a certain city. They opened the market's rolling door, entered the market, and stole 1,004 RMB from the "rocking car" inside the market. 2. At around 3 a.m. on May 29, 2013, defendants Chen and Qiu, along with Zhang and Lin, went to the "Bashu Overlord Fish" store at the intersection of Zijin Road and Jiefang Road in a certain district of a certain city, where they stole a laptop computer (valued at 2,400 RMB) and 290 RMB in cash. The actions of defendants Chen and Qiu violated the provisions of Article X of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, constituting the crime of X. It is requested that they be sentenced in accordance with the law. It was further ascertained that after the incident, a stolen laptop and 970 RMB had been recovered and returned to the victims. The above facts were not disputed by defendants Chen and Qiu during the trial and are supported by the following evidence provided by the prosecution and verified in court: 1. Household registration certificates; 2. Statements of defendants Chen and Qiu; 3. Statements of victims Zhou and Gong; 4. Testimonies of witnesses Kang, Pan, Zhang, and Lin; 5. On-site identification records and photos; 6. Price appraisal report; 7. Arrest process documentation; 8. List of seized and returned items; 9. Power of attorney, etc. The evidence is indeed sufficient to establish the facts.


The prosecution agency charges: Between 4 a.m. and 6 a.m. on March 31, 2014, defendant Liu, knowing that the copper wire was stolen goods obtained by Deng (handled in a separate case) and others, still helped transport the stolen copper wire to defendant Ye's recycling depot, located on a street in a certain village in Shifeng neighborhood, a certain county. Defendant Ye, knowing that this batch of copper wire was stolen property, still proceeded to purchase it. According to the appraisal, the 950 kilograms of copper wire involved in the case is valued at 37,724 RMB. The batch of copper wire has been confiscated by the public security organs and returned to the victim, Qiu Jia. Both defendant Ye and Liu raised no objections to the aforementioned facts during the court trial. Additionally, the evidence includes the confessions of the two defendants on file, the statement of the victim Qiu Jia, testimonies from the witnesses Qiu Yi, Deng Yi, Wang, Shen, and Ye Jia, the "Seizure Record," the "Return List," the "On-Site Inspection Record," the "Identification Record," the "Certain National Mobile Communication Customer Detail List," the "Price Appraisal Conclusion," the "Criminal Record Inquiry," the "Case Circumstances," and the "Household Registration Certificate," which are sufficient for conviction.


The People's Procuratorate of a certain district in Yinchuan City charged that at around 2 a.m. on December 8, 2014, defendants Ding and Cao had a dispute with the victim Shen due to trivial matters at the entrance of a club on Xinhua East Street in a certain district of Yinchuan City. Ding and Cao beat Shen, causing injuries including acute closed craniocerebral injury, a subdural hematoma in the left parietal-occipital region, and traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage. According to forensic identification, the degree of Shen's injuries was classified as second-degree serious injury.


The prosecution charges: 1. Around January 27, 2020, the defendant Wang sought to purchase drugs from the defendant Wu. The defendant Wu sold Wang methamphetamine tablets and a small amount of methamphetamine, collecting payment for the drugs. On the same day, Wang consumed some of the methamphetamine tablets, leaving 2 methamphetamine tablets and a small amount of methamphetamine. 2. On the afternoon of the 28th of the same month, a local resident named Zhang sought to purchase methamphetamine tablets from Wang. Wang acquired methamphetamine tablets from Wu and delivered several methamphetamine tablets to Zhang, collecting 200 yuan from Zhang as payment. Subsequently, Wang paid part of the drug money to Wu. 3. At around 19:00 on the same day, Zhang sought to purchase 3 methamphetamine tablets from Wang and transferred 180 yuan through WeChat as payment. Wang then sought to purchase drugs from Wu, who provided Wang with several methamphetamine tablets. While Wang was delivering drugs to Zhang, Wu made another transaction with a local resident named Liu and received 200 yuan via WeChat, entrusting Wang to deliver 4 methamphetamine tablets to Liu. While on the way to deliver the drugs, Wang discarded some of the methamphetamine tablets after being detected by investigators. Investigators found 2 red circular tablets and 1 vial of white crystalline particles on Wang. The next day, Wang led investigators to a flowerbed in front of No. 48, Ye Wan, Village, Street, Area, where he had discarded 10 red circular tablets. The net weight of the drugs found on Wang and discarded by him was 1.08 grams. Upon analysis, the drug-like substances tested positive for methamphetamine. The prosecution read out and submitted relevant evidence in court.


Upon examination and verification, it was found that on May 13, 2013, at around 19:00, Li (Party B) contacted defendant Cao via telephone, requesting to purchase approximately 1 gram of drugs. Defendant Cao agreed and arranged to make the transaction near the police office in a certain village, on a certain street, in a certain district of a certain city. Subsequently, defendant Cao informed defendant Li of Li (Party B)'s request to purchase drugs. Defendant Li, after contacting Li (Party B), arrived at the said location carrying drugs, and sold a packet of drugs to a plainclothes police officer posing as Li (Party B) for 400 yuan. After the transaction was completed, the police officer apprehended defendant Li on the spot and seized the drugs involved in the transaction and a mobile phone used as a tool for the crime. An appraisal confirmed that the drugs weighed 0.96 grams and contained methamphetamine. After being captured, defendant Cao reported the criminal activities of others, which were verified to be true. The aforementioned facts were uncontested by defendants Cao and Li during the court hearing, and were corroborated by witness testimonies from Li (Party B), Huang, and Hu, as well as identification records and photos, inspection records and photos, a list of seized items, physico-chemical examination reports, drug custody certificates, call records, explanatory notes, detention certificates and criminal execution notices, merit recognition opinion reports, birth medical certificates, arrest procedures, population information, criminal judgment documents, administrative penalty decisions, and community drug rehabilitation decisions, providing sufficient evidence for a conviction.


The People's Procuratorate of a certain district in Rizhao City, Shandong Province, charges that on May 17, 2014, at around 3 PM, the defendant Ding, after drinking, caused a disturbance in front of a stall operated by a certain Liu on the commercial street of a certain village in a certain town of a certain district in Rizhao City, and assaulted Liu. After receiving a report, police officers from a certain town police station of Donggang Branch, Rizhao Public Security Bureau, arrived at the scene intending to take the defendant Ding back to the police station. The defendant Ding refused to cooperate, biting officer Liu on the neck, injuring officer Ding in the eye and kicking his leg, and tearing the clothes of both officer Ding and officer Zhang. The defendant Chen obstructed the police from taking Ding away and insulted and assaulted officers Ding and Yin. According to an assessment, the injuries of officers Ding and Liu constitute minor injuries. The prosecution submitted evidence such as household registration certificates, photos of the injuries, testimony from witnesses like Zhang, and forensic medical injury assessment reports.


The prosecution alleges that on November 5, 2015, at approximately 21:40, Wu contacted the defendant Li by phone to purchase ketamine. Subsequently, Li and the defendant Wei went together to the Delicious 100 Restaurant on Longkun South Road in Qiongshan District, a city. Wei sold a small packet of ketamine to Wu in the men's bathroom on the second floor of the restaurant for 300 yuan. After the transaction was completed, the three were caught on the spot by the police. The police confiscated the 300 yuan of drug money from Wei, a mobile phone from Li, and a small packet of ketamine from Wu, who was purchasing the drugs. According to the forensic evaluation by the Public Security Judicial Identification Center of a certain city, the drugs confiscated from Wu weighed 1.5015 grams net and contained ketamine. The aforementioned facts were not disputed by the defendants Li and Wei during the trial, and are corroborated by evidence including the household registration information of defendants Li and Wei, the account of the incident, a list of seized items, the testimony of witness Wu, the confessions of defendants Li and Wei, the chemical analysis report, recognition records and photographs, site investigation records, orientation diagrams, and on-site photos, which are sufficient to establish the facts.


After trial, it was found: On the afternoon of December 20, 2013, the defendants Long and Yu drove a black Hyundai sedan with the license plate Su S××××× to the entrance of No. 38, Yinjia Alley, Xiyan Village Committee, Hengshanqiao Town, Wujin District of a certain city. Taking advantage of the absence of people, they stole a female shepherd dog belonging to the victim Yin, valued at 12,000 RMB. After the crime, the dog was found by the victim Yin himself. Defendant Long actively compensated the victim with 10,000 RMB for economic losses and obtained his understanding. It was also found that after defendant Yu was captured, he voluntarily confessed to Long's criminal activities and assisted the investigators in persuading him to surrender. Defendant Long surrendered to the police at the Hengshanqiao Police Station, Wujin District Public Security Bureau, and truthfully confessed the facts on December 20, 2013. The aforementioned facts were undisputed by defendants Long and Yu during the trial, and were confirmed by the victim Yin’s statement record, testimony records from witnesses Ren and Gong, the incident report and arrest report produced and provided by the public security organs, photos of stolen goods, identification records and photos, surveillance video data, and the appraisal conclusion of the value of the involved items, which are sufficient to be recognized.


The People's Procuratorate of a certain city charges: On the evening of January 17, 2015, after planning a theft, defendants Liu, Jiang, and Li each brought tools for the crime such as flashlights, gloves, and homemade keys to an alley near the station in Tiantou Village, a town in the city. Seeing that the iron door on the first floor of victim Yan Mouyi's house was open, defendant Li stood watch on the first floor while defendants Liu and Jiang entered the building through the door intending to commit theft. When the two reached the second-floor stairway, local residents discovered them and immediately apprehended all three defendants. It was further found that defendant Liu was involved in a fight during detention at the city's detention center in relation to this case. The aforementioned facts were undisputed by defendants Liu, Jiang, and Li during the trial, and they were supported by the testimony of victim Yan Mouyi, witness Yan Moujia’s testimony, inventory of seized items, flashlight, homemade keys, white gloves, on-site investigation report and photos, identification records, the appraisal opinion on detainee conduct from the city's detention center, the account of how they were brought in, household registration certificates, and the statements of the three defendants during the investigation phase, all of which are sufficient for conviction.


Upon trial, it was found that on November 13, 2014, at around 19:00, defendants Huang and Wei were in a supermarket at Shangshang Jiayuan, Shiyan Street, Bao'an District, waiting for an opportunity to pickpocket. Defendant Wei acted as a lookout, while defendant Huang, taking advantage of victim Zhu's inattention, used tweezers to extract a Xiaomi 2S phone from victim Zhu's bag, after which the two fled. According to the appraisal, the involved Xiaomi 2S 16G phone was valued at 1,000 RMB. Around 21:28 on November 19, 2014, defendants Huang and Wei returned to the same location and used the same method to pickpocket victim Xiao’s Meizu MX3 phone. The appraisal valued the involved Meizu MX3 16G phone at 1,090 RMB. On November 20 of the same year, at around 19:00, defendants Huang and Wei were apprehended at a supermarket at Shangshang Jiayuan, Shiyan Street, Bao'an District. The public security authorities seized a silver pair of tweezers from defendant Huang as the crime tool. The aforementioned criminal facts were not disputed by defendants Huang and Wei during the trial. Moreover, they were corroborated by the defendants' confessions, the testimony of witness Yang, statements from victims Zhu and Xiao, the defendants’ identification documents, prior criminal records, arrest records, seizure warrant and inventory list, photos of the crime tool, surveillance video screenshots, documentary and physical evidence, value appraisal reports, on-site inspection records and photos, and other evidence presented during the trial, all of which were sufficient for conviction.


The People's Procuratorate of a certain locality accused: From February to April 2019, defendants Wu and Kang, together with Ma (separately prosecuted) and Zhang2 (separately prosecuted), falsely claimed to be aiding others in obtaining loans. Using the pretext that the client needed to transfer a vehicle under their name as part of the loan application process, they persuaded the victims to take out loans to purchase a second-hand car under Wu's name. After the loan was transferred to Wu's account, the group then sold the vehicle out of the province, resulting in excess loan amounts under the victims' names. Wu and Kang, together with others, committed fraud on four occasions, resulting in Bai Namu's name being saddled with an excess loan amount of 66,800 yuan, Lu having 102,000 yuan, E having 58,588 yuan, and Liu having 127,515 yuan; the total amount involved in the case is 354,903 yuan in RMB. To prove the facts of the charges, the public prosecution agency, under the court's auspices, interrogated defendants Wu and Kang in court and presented and read the relevant evidence.


The People's Procuratorate of a certain district in a certain city charges: On September 1, 2013, the defendant Wang set up 23 gambling machines with gambling functions for others to gamble in the storefronts of No. 103 to No. 105, Building 4, Lanxin Jiayuan Community, a certain district of a certain city. The defendant Hu, knowing that the defendant Wang had set up gambling machines with gambling functions for others to gamble, still accepted Wang's employment to serve as the lobby manager of the gaming room, responsible for the daily management of the gaming room, and recruited Zhao and Li (both handled separately) as attendants, responsible for providing services such as adding and deducting points on the gaming machines for customers. On the afternoon of September 10, 2013, the police inspected the gaming room, seizing 23 gambling machines with gambling functions and 6 gamblers on the spot, and confiscating gambling funds of 7,790 yuan and 7,825 yuan from Zhao and Li respectively (which have been turned over to the state treasury). On September 24, 2013, the defendant Wang voluntarily turned himself in to the public security authorities and truthfully confessed to the act of opening a casino. The prosecution has provided relevant evidence in court regarding the criminal facts charged in the indictment.


The prosecution charges that from July to September 2020, the defendant Liu organized and invited others to participate in "Three Card" gambling activities at an underground restaurant set up in the home of the defendant Zhang, located in the Grain Bureau Residential Area of Xiangcheng District, Xiangyang City. Zhang was responsible for the daily management and expenses of the venue, and distributed chips to the gamblers. Each participant paid 200 yuan as a "tea fee," which Zhang and Liu split equally. On September 16, 2020, Liu once again organized and invited Kou, He, Huang, and others to the venue. Liu, Kou, and six others engaged in "Three Card" gambling activities with stakes of 200 yuan to win 400 yuan, each receiving chips representing 30,000 yuan in gambling funds from Zhang. He, Huang, and four others engaged in "Three Card" gambling activities with stakes of 100 yuan to win 200 yuan, each receiving chips representing 20,000 yuan in gambling funds from Zhang. While the gambling activities were taking place, the participants were apprehended by investigators. At the scene, chips representing over 300,000 yuan in gambling funds were seized.


The prosecution charges: From the end of June 2013 to August 21 of the same year, the defendant Zhang instructed defendants Wang, Yuan, Mei, Meng, Wei, and others to force the victims Cen, Li, Zhou, and Hui to participate in illegal pyramid schemes to boost performance. They adopted illegal means such as confinement and limiting external communication. The victims were illegally detained at various locations, including Room 405, Building 1, Oil Factory Dormitory, Yangming Street in a certain city. Among them, defendants Wang and Yuan illegally detained victim Cen for more than 50 days and victim Li for more than 30 days. Defendants Wang, Yuan, Mei, Meng, and Wei illegally detained victim Zhou for 14 days, and defendants Mei, Meng, and Wei illegally detained victim Hui for 4 days. On August 21, 2013, defendants Zhang, Wang, Yuan, Mei, Meng, and Wei were apprehended by police officers from a certain city's Public Security Bureau. The aforementioned facts were not disputed by defendants Zhang, Wang, Yuan, Mei, Meng, and Wei during the trial. They were substantiated by documentary evidence, photographic explanations, the "capture process," demographic information, statements from victims Cen, Li, Zhou, and Hui, as well as search records and identification transcripts from the city's Public Security Bureau, which are sufficient to establish these facts.


The People's Procuratorate of Haizhu District in a certain city charged that on November 4, 2014, at approximately 20:00, defendants Yan, Zhao, and Xia were near the entrance of the Yuanqiang Chess and Card Club on Nancun Road, Haizhu District. In order to evade police officer Guo from impounding their illegally operated three-wheeled motorcycle, defendant Yan pushed away the on-duty police officer in an attempt to drive the vehicle away. Defendant Zhao then wrapped his arms around the officer from behind and held on, while defendant Xia hugged the officer’s legs, obstructing the officer's law enforcement activities. Subsequently, defendants Yan, Xia, and Zhao were apprehended on the spot. The facts mentioned above are corroborated by evidence including the registration form for accepted cases, decision to file a case, case investigation process, investigative report, on-site identification record of the criminal case, search warrant, search record, work certification, and on-site inspection record provided by the Haizhu District Branch of the Public Security Bureau of the city. Other evidence includes photocopies of administrative enforcement measures certificates by traffic management authorities, on-site photographs, household registration certifications of defendants Yan, Xia, and Zhao issued by the Xiangcheng Municipal Public Security Bureau, a photocopy of the victim Guo's police officer identification, a photocopy of the city security officer's permit provided by witness Peng, statements and identification records of the victim Guo, the testimonies of witnesses Guan, Xu, Peng, Zeng, and the identification records by Xu and Peng, as well as the confessions and handwritten statements of defendants Yan, Xia, and Zhao, all of which are sufficient to support the charges. The defendants expressed no objections during the trial, adequately establishing the case.


Upon examination, it is found that in the early morning of January 31, 2016, the defendant Zhou had a verbal altercation with the victim Huang over trivial matters at a motel in the Hechuan District, Heyang City, located at the Fujiang First Bridge. Subsequently, the defendant Zhou engaged in a physical altercation with the victim Huang while holding a knife. Zhou then called the defendant Liu to come and assist in the fight. After arriving downstairs at the motel, defendant Zhou called the victim Huang to come down to resolve the dispute. The three of them moved to the sidewalk next to Qinglong Street, under the Fujiang First Bridge in the same district. Defendant Zhou slapped the victim Huang on the face, leading to a scuffle among the three. Defendant Zhou again brandished a knife, and together with defendant Liu, assaulted the victim Huang. During the fight, defendant Liu punched Huang in the face, causing Huang to lean back, at which point defendant Zhou took the opportunity to st


The prosecution alleges: 1. On the evening of July 13, 2012, defendants Huang, Qiu, and He conspired to impersonate police officers from a police station to commit robbery. At about 1 a.m. on July 14, 2012, the three defendants, riding a black ladies' motorcycle, encountered victim Chen near the Fengze Gas Station on National Highway 107 in Xixiang Street, Bao'an District. They showed Chen an ID that resembled a police badge and claimed to be police officers from the Xixiang Police Station, asking Chen to assist in an investigation at the police station. Later, when the three defendants took Chen to a place under a bridge near an industrial area on Xixiang Street, they assaulted Chen and tied him up with a rope, robbing him of a Nuoxin A700 mobile phone (valued at 690 RMB according to appraisal) and 75 RMB in cash. 2. At around 3 p.m. on July 14, 2012, defendant Huang and another man (whose specific details are unclear and is being dealt with in a separate case) stopped victim Qin under the overpass at the Xin'an Factory in Huangtian, riding a black ladies' motorcycle. Huang and the other person showed an ID with a certain national emblem and claimed to be police officers. Huang falsely claimed that a fight had occurred nearby and asked victim Qin to go to the police station to assist in the investigation. Subsequently, when Huang and the other person took Qin to a secluded place, they tied Qin's hands and robbed him of a Nokia N73 mobile phone (valued at 220 RMB according to appraisal


Upon trial, it was found that at around 5 p.m. on July 25, 2015, at Zhongyi Rubber & Plastic Co., Ltd. within the Jiezhuang Subdistrict Office in the High-Tech Zone of a certain area, a dispute arose over cleaning issues between the defendants Yuan and Qin. They pushed each other, and after colleagues intervened to separate them, defendant Qin pursued defendant Yuan to his dormitory. The two argued again, during which defendant Qin slapped defendant Yuan in the face, leading to a physical altercation where both parties were injured. Defendant Qin lost his second lower molar, fractured the crown of his third molar, and sustained multiple injuries to his neck, chest, and left eyebrow. Yuan suffered fractures of both nasal bones and a bite injury to his left thumb. According to forensic identification, the injuries sustained by defendants Qin and Yuan were classified as minor injuries of the second degree. On August 24, 2015, defendant Yuan voluntarily surrendered to the public security authorities. Additionally, it was found that during the trial of the case, defendants Qin and Yuan reached a mediation agreement. Defendant Yuan paid defendant Qin 4500 yuan for medical expenses, and they mutually forgave each other. These facts were not disputed by defendants Qin and Yuan during the court hearing, and were sufficiently substantiated by documentary evidence such as the case registration form, case handling notes, household registration certificates, outpatient medical records, and the mediation agreement, as well as the testimonies of witnesses Qu, Zhao A, and Zhao B, and the identification opinion.


The People's Procuratorate of a certain lake district in Ezhou City charged the defendants Liu and Sheng with the crime of X. On April 20, 2016, they filed a public prosecution with this court with indictment number (2016) 18 and suggested that the case be handled through a simplified procedure. After accepting the case, the court applied the simplified procedure according to law, conducted a sole-judge trial, and held a public hearing. The People's Procuratorate of a certain lake district in Ezhou City appointed prosecutor Zhang to appear in court to support the prosecution, and the defendants Liu and Sheng were present to participate in the litigation. The case has now been concluded. The public prosecution agency accused that during the fishing ban periods of 2013 and 2014 in a certain lake, the defendants Liu and Sheng illegally fished aquatic products using "maze nets" in the southern bay waters of a certain lake. On June 4, 2013, Liu and Sheng were caught red-handed by law enforcement officers from the management bureau of the lake in a certain province while illegally fishing with "maze nets" in the southern bay waters. On July 11, 2014, they were again caught red-handed doing the same. On September 10, 2015, Liu surrendered to the public security organ. On April 6, 2016, Sheng also surrendered to the public security organ. The defendants Liu and Sheng had no objections to the aforementioned facts during the trial and voluntarily pleaded guilty. The case was supported by the following in-court evidence presentation and cross-examination, confirmed by this court: the confessions of Liu and Sheng, testimonies from witnesses Ye Jia and Ye Yi, identity information of the defendants, details of their surrender, explanations about "maze nets" and "gill nets," documents from the provincial aquaculture management office, and administrative penalty decisions E Liang Guan Fa (2013) 2017 and (2014) 2007 from the provincial lake management bureau. This evidence is sufficient to establish the facts.


A certain local People's Procuratorate charged: Around 22:00 on a day in mid-July 2013, the defendants Lv and Zhang, along with the suspect Wang B (handled in a separate case), conspired to go to a certain village in a certain town in Suining County. They climbed over the wall into the courtyard of villager Wang A's home and stole a desktop computer. According to the appraisal, the involved computer was valued at 2,890 yuan. The defendants Lv and Zhang did not object to the aforementioned facts during the trial, and there are confessions from the suspect Wang B (handled in a separate case); witness testimonies from Wang C, Wang D, and others; on-site inspection records, site photos, identification records; the physical evidence appraisal report issued by the Public Security Bureau of Suining County; the price verification conclusion certificate from Suining County Price Verification Center; and evidence confirming the case and apprehension process, all sufficient to establish the case.


A certain local People's Procuratorate charges: Starting in April 2012, the criminal suspect "Guo" (specific identity unknown, at large) hired defendants Lin, Lu, Hong, and others to engage in illegal cigarette trade in the city. "Guo" rented a warehouse on the ground floor of the Transportation Building, No. 3, Xinxiu Road, Luohu District, in this city, purchased cigarettes from other places, and handed them to Lin, Lu, Hong for receipt and storage. Once "Guo" found buyers, Lin and others would carry out the sales. On January 8, 2014, the police from the Luohu Branch of Shenzhen Public Security Bureau arrested defendants Lin, Lu, Hong while they were unloading goods in the warehouse mentioned above and confiscated various types of cigarettes used for illegal trade, totaling 5,749 cartons (identified as genuine cigarettes with a total value of RMB 366,680) as well as one truck used for the crime (license plate: [location] B×××××). To support the aforementioned facts, the prosecution submits the following evidence: 1. Physical evidence: a batch of cigarettes involved in the case, one truck; 2. Documentary evidence: search warrant and search record, seizure decision and inventory, certificate issued by Shenzhen Luohu Tobacco Monopoly Bureau, vehicle files, defendants' identification information; 3. Witness testimonies: testimony of witness Chen Mobai, account of the arrest by police officers; 4. Confessions and defenses of the defendants: confessions and defenses of defendants Lin, Lu, Hong; 5. Expert opinions: cigarette and cigar identification inspection report, tobacco monopoly product pricing appraisal conclusion report; 6. Inspection, examination, and identification records: on-site inspection record, site map, site photos, identification record.


The prosecution alleges that in July 2016, the defendant Ge, at XX Square, Jinghe Street, Hunchun City, falsely claimed to Jiang that counterfeit money could be used as real currency and proposed to purchase counterfeit money, proposing a purchase ratio of 1:5, to which both parties agreed. In October 2016, the defendant Ge, in collusion with Li, after discussions, collaborated at the Rhine River Cafe in Jilin City, Jilin Province, using 500 yuan of real currency disguised as counterfeit to make Jiang believe that counterfeit money could pass as real, and be used as such. The two then used spirit money, which they had prepared in advance, pretending it was counterfeit money, and defrauded Jiang of 140,000 yuan. Defendant Jiang purchased 700,000 yuan worth of "counterfeit money" from Ge and Li at a price of 140,000 yuan, only to later discover that the “counterfeit money” was actually spirit money. To establish the above facts, the prosecution presented evidence during the court proceedings, including the process of the arrest and case-solving, photos of physical evidence, a list of seized items, identification records, and the statements and defenses of defendants Ge, Li, and Jiang.


The prosecution alleges: In the early hours of December 21, 2016, the defendants Xu, Qi, and Tang conspired to steal motorcycles in a certain city. Tang then rode a motorcycle carrying Xu and Qi from a town in a certain county to No. 22 Juque Road in another town in the same county. Tang acted as a lookout while Xu and Qi stole a white Honda ordinary two-wheeled scooter parked at the entrance by the victim, Yang. They then rode the stolen motorcycle to the side of the newly constructed Highway 108 on the outskirts of the city, where Tang kept watch. Afterwards, Xu and Qi went to the Yongsheng Residential Area in the city, where they successively stole a white Honda ordinary two-wheeled scooter parked by the victim, Liu, at the entrance of Unit 3, Building 2, and another white Honda ordinary two-wheeled scooter parked by the victim, Qi, at the entrance of Unit 2, Building 1, Area 4. They then used the motorcycle they came on to transport the two stolen motorcycles in two trips to meet Tang at the side of the newly constructed Highway 108 on the outskirts. Since the two motorcycles stolen at Yongsheng could not be started, the three left them at the side of the new Highway 108 and rode Yang's motorcycle back to a town in a certain county to hide it under the color steel shed at Zhou’s home. At noon, Xu and Qi purchased ignition locks for motorcycles in the county and took a vehicle to the county, installed the ignition locks on the parked motorcycles, and each rode one back to a certain power pole factory. They sold Qi’s stolen motorcycle and hid Liu’s stolen motorcycle within the power pole factory’s courtyard. The stolen motorcycles have been recovered by the police and returned to the victims. According to the valuation: Yang's stolen motorcycle was worth 5,958 yuan; Liu's stolen motorcycle was worth 6,695 yuan; Qi's stolen motorcycle was worth 7,735 yuan.


Upon trial, it was found: On July 25, 2013, defendant Xu (online name "魔の少") posted a thread on a local forum regarding victim Huang's illegal construction. Subsequently, under the pressure of online public opinion, Huang asked Xu for help in deleting the post and offered Xu a bribe of 3,000 RMB, which Xu did not accept. Later, Xu used this as a pretext to extort 10,000 RMB and four cartons of Zhonghua brand cigarettes valued at 2,600 RMB from Huang. On July 28, 2013, a report post appeared again on the local forum, which was published by Zhou and later edited by defendant Lou. The next day, Huang once again asked Xu for help in deleting the post. Lou, in collusion with Xu, extorted 10,000 RMB from Huang under the pretext of deleting the post. After deleting the post, Xu extorted an additional 1,500 RMB as a bribe from Huang. It was further found that the 10,000 RMB acquired by defendant Lou was handed over to defendant Xu, and Xu was instructed to return it. Of the extorted money, 9,600 RMB and four cartons of Zhonghua brand cigarettes, excluding the 400 RMB spent by Xu, were seized by the public security authorities and have been returned to the victim Huang. On August 2, 2013, defendant Lou voluntarily surrendered to the county public security bureau. The above facts were not disputed by defendants Xu and Lou during the trial, and are corroborated by the statement of victim Huang, testimonies from witnesses Song, Chen, Zhang A, Zhang B, Zhou, Hong, Zhang C, and Yang, photographs of the local forum webpage, search records and photographs, inventory of seized items, list of returned items, a CD, voice transcription records, a price appraisal conclusion from the county price certification center, proof of voluntary surrender, the defendants' household registration certificates, and the account of their capture, which are sufficient for the determination.


The Xinhua District People's Procuratorate of a certain city charged: On September 13, 2015, the defendant Wang (alias Wang A) in order to develop a pyramid scheme, lured the victim Yu to a certain city under the pretext of hiring staff for his cake shop, and brought Yu to a bungalow near the Fuyuan Vegetable Market in a certain city. Later, the defendant Wang, together with the defendants Zhu, Song, and Sun, brainwashed Yu by teaching pyramid scheme courses, persuading him to join the organization. When Yu expressed his unwillingness to participate and wanted to leave, the defendants Wang and others took turns guarding Yu, restricting his personal freedom. During this period, the defendant Zhu also physically assaulted Yu. After Yu failed to leave, he was forced to swallow a blade to self-harm. Later, during the hospital rescue, Yu seized the opportunity to report to the police, and Wang and the others were then caught by patrolling officers. It was also found that the families of the defendants Sun, Zhu, and Song each compensated the victim Yu for economic losses in the amount of 10,000 yuan, totaling 30,000 yuan. The victim Yu expressed understanding towards the defendants Sun, Zhu, and Song. The aforementioned facts were not contested by the four defendants during the court trial, and they were corroborated by evidence such as the case registration form, the confessions of defendants Sun, Wang, Song, and Zhu, the statement of the victim Yu, the identification record of defendant Song for Zhu, Sun, and Wang, the identification record of the victim Yu for the defendants Zhu, Sun, Wang, and Song, the identification record of the four defendants for the crime scene, the hospital records of the victim Yu, the case handling notes, the mediation agreement, the receipt for the compensation payment, and the household registration certificates of the four defendants. These are sufficient to establish the facts.


The prosecution alleges that on a day in August 2013 and another day in late July 2014, Defendant Chen, in collusion with Defendant Ma, premeditatedly used Chen's position to steal approximately 150 meters and 200 meters of various specifications of power cables from the warehouse of Pinghu City General Electric Installation Co., Ltd. The stolen cables were then sold by Defendant Ma, and a profit of 70,000 RMB was made from the sale. Appraisal determined that the total value of these cables was 71,204 RMB. It is further ascertained that after the incident, Defendant Chen returned 71,204 RMB to the victimized company. The defendants did not dispute these criminal facts during the court trial, and the facts are substantiated by evidence such as theft reports, work proof, witness testimonies, search records, seizure orders, lists and photographs of seized items, receipts for returned funds, appraisal reports on value, records of unlawful conduct inquiries, the case incident report, explanation of circumstances, and identification proofs. These are sufficient to confirm the facts.


The prosecution alleged: Between approximately March 10, 2014, and March 25, 2014, the defendants Ye and Li colluded to provide conditions for "Show Hand" gambling for gamblers Zhuang, Feng, Wu, Huang, Zhang, and others in a certain private room at the Bayidi Café on Siming West Road, Lanjiang Street, in a certain room on Siming West Road, Cloud Palace, Lanjiang Street, and in a certain room at Sunshine International, Yangming Street. Defendant Ye profited more than 10,000 RMB by taking a commission; Defendant Li provided gambling funds totaling 62,000 RMB to gamblers Zhuang, Feng, Huang, and Zhang and illegally gained over 1,000 RMB. On March 25, 2014, defendants Ye and Li were arrested by police officers of the city’s Public Security Bureau. The aforementioned facts were also undisputed by defendants Ye and Li during the trial. These facts are substantiated by documentary evidence including photographs, vouchers for temporarily detained funds, a list of confiscated items, payment notices, administrative penalty decisions, the "account of the arrest," identity information, witness testimonies from Zhuang, Feng, Wu, Huang, and Zhang, identification records and photographs, and examination records, which are sufficient for conviction.


The prosecution alleges that the defendant, Zheng, is an employee of a certain national telecommunications company’s municipal district branch, responsible for the Unicom broadband services in a specific town in the district. The defendant, Yang, is an employee of a certain city’s communication technology company, responsible for the installation and maintenance of Unicom broadband cables in the area. In April 2013, because the Unicom broadband cables in the Tongchun residential area were frequently cut deliberately, leading to an increase in customer complaints, defendant Zheng instructed defendant Yang to pay attention to this matter. On the morning of April 19, 2013, at around 10 a.m., while working in the residential area, defendant Yang saw Wang, the victim and a staff member of Gulin Telecom, and informed defendant Zheng by phone. Defendant Zheng rushed to the residential area and met with defendant Yang near building 32. Defendant Zheng used an iron water pipe, which was prepared in advance, to repeatedly strike the victim Wang on the head, arms, and other parts, causing Wang to fall to the ground after being injured. During this time, defendant Yang also kicked the victim Wang. Subsequently, defendant Zheng called the police (defendant Yang was also present at the scene), and after the police arrived at the scene, both defendants voluntarily turned themselves in. After being apprehended, they truthfully confessed to the aforementioned criminal acts. According to an evaluation,


A certain People's Procuratorate charged that at around 20:00 on May 6, 2016, the defendant Bu, in collusion with E and Wang (at large), was having a meal at a certain hot pot restaurant and assaulted Hai over a trivial matter, causing injuries to Hai. According to the forensic examination by the Koryo Front Banner Public Security Bureau, Hai's injuries were classified as minor injuries of the first degree. After the incident, the two defendants voluntarily turned themselves in. During the trial, the prosecution presented evidence including household registration certificates; the victim Hai's statement; testimonies from witnesses such as Xiao; the forensic report on the degree of bodily harm; and the defendants' confessions.


The People's Procuratorate of a certain district in Wuhan City charges that in the early morning of October 21, 2014, the defendants De and Di, along with Ji (who is still at large), conspired beforehand to commit a crime at No. 130, Jixian Village, in a certain district of this city. With Di and Ji serving as lookouts, De climbed the external water pipe of the building and entered the victim Tu's house through a window, stealing a Sony mobile phone valued at 150 RMB. Subsequently, De, Di, and Ji went to No. 76, Yudai Village in the same district. With De and Di as lookouts, Ji climbed the building's external water pipe and entered the victim Zhang's house through a window, stealing a Dell laptop valued at 1,300 RMB. After the crime occurred, the public security authorities investigated and apprehended the defendants De and Di. The stolen items had already been sold, and the proceeds had been squandered. The aforementioned facts were not disputed by the defendants De and Di during the court proceedings and are corroborated by evidence including criminal investigation photos, the process of solving the case, purchase receipts, the statements of the victims Tu and Zhang, appraisal opinions on the value of the stolen goods, audiovisual materials, and the defendants' confessions, all of which are sufficient to establish the facts of the case.


The People's Procuratorate of a certain district in a certain city indicted that around 19:00 on October 31, 2013, the defendants Yan and He, together with "Zhang" and "Liao" (handled in a separate case), forcibly took Shi B, who was involved in a debt dispute with Jin, to the Manhattan Business Hotel in Keqiao Street, a certain district of a certain city. During this time, they verbally threatened and beat Shi B, forcing him to repay the debt. By around 20:00 on November 3, 2013, Shi B was rescued by police officers from the Public Security Bureau of a certain district in a certain city. These facts were not disputed by the defendants Yan and He during the trial, and were confirmed by evidence such as the arrest process and statements provided by police officers, accommodation records, testimonies from Jin, Ma, Zhao, Zhong, Shi A, the statement of Shi B, and the identification transcripts of the defendants Yan and He, which are sufficient to establish the case.


The People's Procuratorate of a certain district in a certain city charges that on November 5, 2016, at around 10:00 am, the defendants Wu and Yang went to the Kecaifu shoe store at the Xinlan Life Plaza on Daji Street, in a certain district of a certain city. Defendant Yang was responsible for covering, while defendant Wu took the opportunity to steal a VIVO X6 phone from the pocket of Wang, who was trying on shoes. The stolen phone was appraised at a value of 1200 RMB. The public prosecution agency provided corresponding evidence to substantiate the above facts.


The prosecution agency charged that around 5 a.m. on February 23, 2015, the defendant Gao, after consuming alcohol, got into an argument with the victim Wang, with the intent to retaliate against Wang. Gao then gathered the defendants Bai, Cheng, and Yao (real name unknown, at large). Defendant Bai, armed with a baseball bat, and Yao, armed with an entrenching tool, along with defendants Gao and Cheng, entered Room 410 of the Home Inn on Saima Road North, Hohhot, where Wang was staying. Defendant Bai used the baseball bat and Yao used the entrenching tool to beat the victim Wang, while defendants Gao and Cheng also punched and kicked Wang, injuring his nose and face. During the beating, they knocked over a kettle of hot water, which scalded Wang's left leg. According to the appraisal by the Hohhot Public Security Bureau's forensic evidence office, the injuries to Wang's nose and face were identified as second-degree minor injuries, and the injury to his left leg was identified as minor


Upon examination, it was found that at around 8 PM on May 11, 2015, defendants Feng and Ke were driving their vehicles to the roadside at the entrance of the Park Shijia construction site on Dijiao Qianjie in the Jiang'an District of this city. Due to heavy pedestrian and vehicular traffic, their vehicles moved slowly. Defendants Feng and Ke suspected that the victims, Gui A and Gui B, who were walking alongside the road, had insulted them. Subsequently, the two defendants got out of their cars and attacked the victims Gui A and Gui B with weapons, causing injuries. An assessment determined that Gui A sustained minor injuries of the second degree, while Gui B sustained slight injuries.

On May 28, 2015, the police arrested defendant Feng; on June 8, 2015, defendant Ke voluntarily surrendered to the police. After the incident, through mediation by the People's Mediation Committee of the Danshuichi Street, Jiang'an District, Wuhan City, relatives of defendants Feng and Ke voluntarily compensated victims Gui A and Gui B for their economic losses with amounts of RMB 50,000 and 10,000, respectively, and obtained the victims' forgiveness.

These facts were not contested by defendants Feng and Ke during the trial and are substantiated by evidence including the accounts of the police regarding the apprehension and case solving process, explanation of circumstances, police dispatch information forms, and case handling descriptions; statements from victims Gui A and Gui B; testimonies from witnesses, such as Zhang and He; inspection records and identification records; forensic clinical evaluation reports; video materials; applications, commission letters, commitment letters, receipts, and the people's mediation agreement; as well as the confessions of defendants Feng and Ke, among others, which are sufficient for the conviction.


Upon examination, it has been found that: On October 1, 2013, defendant Luo, after contacting defendant Zhou by phone, prepared tools for the crime such as an oil pump, a screwdriver, and large plastic bags. Luo then drove a silver-gray Wuling Zhiguang van, rented under the name “Song” with license plate Gui G×××××, to meet Zhou at the Anshun train station. After meeting, Luo suggested stealing diesel fuel and replaced the van’s license plate with one provided by Zhou, Gui G×××××. At around 5 a.m. the following day, the two defendants drove the van to the area outside the perimeter wall of the parking lot at the industrial building site in Dashuigou, Dongguan Office, Xixiu District, Xing City. They used a screwdriver to pry open the fuel tanks and extracted diesel using an oil pump method, targeting the 0# diesel fuel in the tanks of three blue agricultural vehicles belonging to victims Zhang, Luo Jia, and Liu, parked in this location. The defendants placed the stolen 0# diesel into large plastic bags on the van, then drove the van inside the construction site parking lot perimeter, where they further targeted the 0# diesel fuel in the tanks of two excavators owned by victim Zhang. In total, they stole 300 liters of 0# diesel, valued at RMB 2235. After being discovered, the two defendants abandoned their crime tools, diesel, and the van at the scene and fled. The defendants raised no objection to the above facts during the trial. Additionally, evidence including the defendants’ househo


The People's Procuratorate of a certain county charges: Defendant Mao had a debt dispute with Wei Yiyi, leading to a conflict between them. On June 8, 2015, around 3:00 PM, Mao invited Zhan, Xiang, Mei (at large), and others to take revenge on Wei Yiyi. Mao borrowed the car (license plate E J×××××) from his friend Chen and drove with Zhan, Xiang, and Mei, armed with steel pipes and wooden sticks, to the vicinity of Wei Yiyi's home in a certain village of a certain town. There, he instructed Zhan, Xiang, Mei, and others to smash the car with license plate E J××××× parked in front of Wei Yiyi's house, after which they fled the scene. According to the county's price appraisal department, the damaged car's loss was valued at 9,208.20 RMB.


Through the trial, the following facts were ascertained: Between September 27, 2012, and July 9, 2013, the defendants Yao and Zhou collaborated to set up a POS terminal at their business, "Huitong Tobacco and Alcohol Store," located at XX Ruihu Road, Anyang Street, in a certain city. They provided credit card cash-out services to others by fabricating transactions, charging a commission of 1%-1.5% per 10,000 yuan of cash-out, paying a 0.78% fee to the bank. The total credit card cash-out amounted to over 3,100,000 yuan, with Yao and Zhou illegally profiting more than 10,000 yuan. On July 10, 2013, defendant Yao was apprehended by public security personnel within his tobacco and alcohol store, and the POS terminal used for the crime was seized. The following day, defendant Zhou surrendered to the authorities and truthfully confessed his criminal activities. After the incident, defendants Yao and Zhou returned the illicit gains totaling 10,000 yuan. The aforementioned facts were uncontested by defendants Yao and Zhou during the trial, and were corroborated by witness testimonies from Chen Jia, Chen Yi, Tang, and Wang, as well as search records, seizure lists and photos, POS transaction records, documents provided by the Ruian Branch of the Wenzhou Tobacco Company, which include inventory lists, delivery notes, sales slips, shipping orders, the apprehension process, and demographic information, all of which are sufficient for a determination.


The prosecution alleged that from March 2015 to October 2015, defendants Wang and Zhang operated the Parkour Little Bear Shoe Factory at No. 9, District 4, Shicitou Village, Hengfeng Street, a certain city. Due to poor management, they owed wages totaling RMB 111,259 to 11 employees, including Xu Moujia and Yang Mou. On October 8, 2015, defendants Wang and Zhang absconded to avoid paying these wages and changed their contact phone numbers. On October 10, 2015, the Labor and Social Security Bureau of a certain city issued a labor security supervision order to Wang and Zhang, demanding rectification within a prescribed period. However, Wang and Zhang still failed to pay the workers their wages. Subsequently, landlord Ye sold the equipment and products left behind by Wang and Zhang, and the earnings from the sale were used to pay the workers by the labor department. On January 21, 2016, the police from the Xihu Branch of the Public Security Bureau in a certain city in Jiangxi Province apprehended defendant Wang in Room 430 of the Xianshi Road Qianai Art Hotel in Donghu District, a certain city. On January 23, 2016, the police notified defendant Zhang to appear via a phone call. After turning themselves in, defendants Wang and Zhang truthfully confessed to the facts of the case. The aforementioned facts were also undisputed by defendants Wang and Zhang during the trial and were corroborated by the testimony of witness Ye, statements from victims Xu Moujia, Xie, Yang, Qin, Xu Mouyi, Xu Moubing, Ge, and Fang, the labor security supervision order and delivery receipt, criminal record checks, situation explanations, wage payment status sheet, proof, defendants' demographic information, and the circumstances leading to their apprehension, all of which are sufficient to establish the case.


The prosecution accused: Between late August and September 4, 2014, defendants Song, Ke, Dai, Huang, Yin, Wei, and Tu operated a casino using the "dice game" method at No. 118 Moon Mountain, Xisaishan District of this city, and organized gambling gatherings five times. Among them: at around 3 a.m. on August 30, 2014, they organized more than 30 people to participate in gambling, with a total profit of about 5,300 yuan; at around 3 a.m. on September 1 of the same year, they organized more than 40 people to participate in gambling, with a total profit of about 6,000 yuan; at around 3 a.m. on September 3 of the same year, they organized more than 40 people to participate in gambling, with a total profit of about 10,000 yuan. There was one additional attempt that failed and another where they were caught on the spot.


After a trial, it was found that at around 8 p.m. on November 1, 2019, defendants Luo, Liu, and Huo successively had meals and drinks at Xiao Cai Restaurant at Group 143 and at Maimaiti BBQ Restaurant. At around 1 a.m. on November 2, 2019, defendant Luo left Maimaiti BBQ Restaurant and walked to the roadside, where he nearly collided with Zhang, who was passing by on an electric tricycle, leading to a dispute between the two. During the argument, defendant Luo pulled Zhang off the electric tricycle and punched him. The two then engaged in a scuffle. During this time, defendants Liu and Huo exited the BBQ restaurant and rushed forward upon seeing the situation, and the three defendants collectively punched and kicked Zhang and Zhang's wife, Lei, who came to intervene. According to the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps Eighth Division Public Security Judicial Appraisal Center, both victims Zhang and Lei sustained minor injuries. Further investigation revealed the following: 1. On November 2, 2019, the police from the Xijiao Police Station of the Shihezi City Public Security Bureau summoned defendants Luo, Liu, and Huo to the police station by phone for investigation. Upon arrival, the three defendants truthfully confessed the main criminal facts of their and their accomplices' actions. 2. After the incident, defendants Luo, Liu, and Huo reached a compensation agreement with the victims Zhang and Lei. The three defendants agreed to compensate the victims for medical expenses, lost wages, and other costs totaling 25,000 yuan. The two victims issued a written letter of forgiveness, expressing understanding toward the three defendants and requesting leniency in their punishment. The above facts are confirmed by evidence such as the police case registration form and the decision to file a case, the victims Lei and Zhang's report materials and statements, witness Wang's testimony, defendants Luo, Liu, and Huo's confessions and defenses, on-site inspection records, site maps, site photos, surveillance video discs and descriptions, judicial appraisal documents, the letter of understanding, the process of the three defendants being brought to the case, and household registration information forms, all of which are sufficient to establish the facts.


After the trial, it was found that on August 24, 2014, at around 21:00, defendants Wang, He, and Yin went to the square on the south side of Jinhua Garden Community in a certain town of a certain county to the "Old Yu Barbecue" restaurant. Without any reason, they assaulted Yu and Qiao and damaged some items in the barbecue restaurant. The appraisal determined that the value of the damaged items was 2,488 yuan. On August 27, 2014, defendants Wang, He, and Yin turned themselves in to the public security bureau of a certain county. It was also found that defendant Wang and victim Yu had reached a compensation agreement, and the victim provided a receipt and a letter of understanding. The above facts were not disputed by defendants Wang, He, and Yin during the court hearing. The statements of victims Yu and Qiao, testimony of witness Zhang, documentary evidence such as the case registration form, photos related to the case, police response registration form, hospital medical records, criminal judgment, case handling statements, certificates, household registration proof, identification record, and appraisal opinion from a certain province on the valuation of items involved in the case were sufficient to establish these facts.


The prosecution alleges: At approximately 22:00 on August 18, 2014, after conspiring together, the defendants Yang and Long used Long's rented residence as the venue, located at Room 301, No. 56 Huahai Street, Xizhou North Road, Songzhou Street, Baiyun District of this city. Yang was responsible for dealing cards, and the two organized gambling with multiple participants at the aforementioned location, profiting through taking a cut. In the early morning of August 19 of the same year, the police apprehended the two defendants at the scene and confiscated one deck of playing cards used for gambling and gambling funds totaling 3,225 RMB. To substantiate the alleged facts, during the court hearing, the prosecution read and presented evidence including witness testimonies, documentary evidence, and the confessions of the defendants.


The People's Procuratorate of a certain place charged that on the afternoon of September 20, 2012, after a meeting at Jin Niu Microcrystalline Group Co., Ltd., a decision was made to have the defendant Zhao lead an investigation into the suspicion that employee Zhao [Note: This "Zhao" is a different person, translated as a placeholder "Zhao X"] leaked trade secrets. At around 8 p.m. that evening, the defendant Wang and others forcibly took Zhao X to Room 204 of the Jin Niu Glass Factory Guesthouse for questioning. During this period, the defendant Zhao questioned Zhao X and did not allow him to leave, while the defendant Wang arranged for personnel from the Security Department to take turns guarding Zhao X to prevent him from leaving. It was not until around 5 p.m. on September 24, 2012, that Zhao X managed to leave. In support of the above accusations, the public prosecution provided the court with the defendants' confessions and defenses, the victim's statements, witness testimonies, and relevant documentary evidence.


Upon examination, it was found: 1. On a day in July 2012, the defendant Li purchased an imitation sniper rifle for entertainment at a store in the Yan Scenic Area for over 300 yuan. The firearm was confiscated by the police on November 30, 2012. Performance evaluation of the gun and ammunition showed that the firearm met the criteria of an air rifle and had the potential to cause injury. 2. On a day in August 2012, the defendant Li bought an imitation gun for approximately 4000 yuan from Xu’s outdoor goods store in Zijin Wusheng for use in live-action CS games. Performance evaluation of the gun and ammunition showed that the firearm met the criteria of an air rifle and had the potential to cause injury. 3. On a day in October 2012, the defendant Li purchased a high-pressure air gun from He (who has been sentenced) for 16,000 yuan, which included a large compressed air tank, two small compressed air tanks, and more than 2,400 lead bullets. This air gun was later used by Li for hunting. Performance evaluation of the gun and ammunition showed that the firearm met the criteria of an air rifle and had the potential to cause injury. The remaining 1,861 bullets were air rifle bullets with the same performance as the lead bullets. 4. In April 2011, the defendant Xu purchased a BB gun with a foldable stock online for 1,500 yuan. Performance evaluation of the firearm showed that it met the criteria of an air rifle and had the potential to cause injury. 5. In June 2011, the defendant Xu purchased two BB guns online at a price of 2,300 yuan each. One of them was equipped with accessories and transferred to Li for approximately 4,000 yuan, while the other one was kept by Xu. Performance evaluation of the firearm Xu retained showed that it met the criteria of an air rifle and had the potential to cause injury. The aforementioned facts were undisputed by defendants Li and Xu during the trial; they voluntarily pleaded guilty. The evidence, which includes a documentary inventory of the seized items, photos, household registration materials, the testimony of the witness He, the gun and ammunition evaluation report, the search record, and identification record, is sufficient to establish these facts.


The prosecution alleges that at approximately 2 a.m. on August 3, 2018, the victim, Li, after drinking, had a conflict with the defendants Zhao and Guo over trivial matters at a beer stand in the city's cultural square. Subsequently, during the scuffle, Li pushed the defendant Guo to the ground. Upon seeing this, the defendants Zhao, Yi, and Du, along with defendant Guo, jointly assaulted Li, resulting in multiple injuries to Li's head and face. According to an assessment by the Jinchuang District Public Security Judicial Appraisal Center in a certain city, followed by an assessment by the Judicial Appraisal Center of Gansu University of Political Science and Law, Li was diagnosed with minor neurological symptoms from head trauma and left eye muscle paralysis with diplopia secondary to eye injury, classified as second-degree minor injury. The evidence supporting the above charges includes the victim Li's statement, testimonies from witnesses Li, Li, and Ma, injury photos, scene photos,


Upon trial, it was found that: On January 14, 2016, at approximately 18:00, the defendants Liang and Chen drove from the Baimang Checkpoint in Xili Street, Nanshan District, Shenzhen City, to the Tianhexuan Restaurant in Baozhu Garden, Xili, intending to steal someone else's property. At around 18:30, in the aforementioned restaurant, the defendants Liang and Chen took advantage of the victim Long's inattention, with Chen keeping watch and Liang executing the theft, and stole the wallet from the pocket of the coat draped over the back of the victim's chair. After succeeding, the two defendants quickly fled the scene. Upon verification, the wallet of the victim Long contained 4,700 yuan in cash, an identity card, a bank card, and other items. On January 22, 2016, the public security organs apprehended defendant Liang. On March 1, 2016, they apprehended defendant Chen. The aforementioned facts were not disputed by defendants Liang and Chen during the court proceedings, and are substantiated by the case registration form, the decision to file the case, the notice of evidence collection, the arrest process, the defendants' identity information, the on-site drug testing report, the criminal judgment of the Futian District People's Court of Shenzhen City, a certain province (2012) Shenfu Criminal Initial No. 1120, the certificate of release after serving the sentence, the criminal judgment of the Xinhui People's Court of Jiangmen City, a certain province (2015) Jiangxin Criminal Initial No. 331, the certificate of release after serving the sentence, the administrative penalty decision, the case registration form, the public security administrative penalty decision, the decision of compulsory drug rehabilitation, the testimonies of witnesses Xiong and Zou, the statement of the victim Long, the identification transcripts of the defendants Liang and Chen, the Xilaon (South) Criminal Investigation [2016] No. 0126067 inspection work record, a CD, surveillance video screenshots, and the confessions and defenses of defendants Liang and Chen, all of which have been verified as credible evidence sufficient to establish the facts.


Upon trial, it was found that around 16:00 on September 1, 2016, defendants Yu and Yang, at No. 9, Building 2, Floor 2, Gong'an Village, Jiang'an District in this city, had a dispute with the victim, Chen, regarding the debt settlement of their mother, Bai. Subsequently, Yu and Yang injured Chen by hitting his head, face, chest, and abdomen, resulting in soft tissue injuries to the head and face and multiple left rib fractures (left ribs 2-4). According to an assessment, Chen's injuries were classified as minor injuries, level two. On November 1, 2016, defendant Yu voluntarily surrendered to the public security authority after receiving a call from the police and truthfully confessed to the aforementioned facts. On November 30 of the same year, the public security agency apprehended defendant Yang, who was listed as wanted online. During the trial at this court, the family members of defendants Yu and Yang reached a settlement agreement with the victim Chen, with Yu and Yang's family compensating Chen for economic losses in the amount of 30,000 yuan (excluding previously paid medical expenses), which has already been paid. Chen expressed forgiveness toward the actions of Yu and Yang. The above facts were undisputed by defendants Yu and Yang during the court proceedings. Additionally, the facts are confirmed by evidence including the arrest and case-solving procedures; statements of victim Chen; testimonies of witnesses Gong, Yuan, and Bai; basic resident information, detailed police response records, fugitive registration form, administrative penalty decision, prior situation explanations, medical records, temporary hospital payment receipts, settlement agreement, receipts and other documentary evidence; inspection transcripts; forensic clinical assessment report; and the confessions and defenses of defendants Yu and Yang, all of which are sufficient for validation.


Upon investigation, it has been found that the defendants, Yang and Wei, were employees of the Bijie branch of the Hebei Communication Construction Company. They were responsible for installing base station equipment for the Jinsha branch of China Mobile Group Guizhou Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Jinsha Mobile Company). On June 26, 2011, at approximately 9 AM, the defendants, Yang and Wei, went to the warehouse of Jinsha Mobile Company located in Wulipo, a certain town, to transport the base station iron frames and stole four 800AH and three 500AH base station batteries that belonged to Jinsha Mobile Company from the warehouse. According to the certification by the Jinsha County Price Certification Center, the stolen seven base station batteries were valued at 2,700 yuan. The day after the incident, the defendants, Yang and Wei, returned the stolen batteries to Jinsha Mobile Company and obtained their understanding. The aforementioned facts are not contested by the defendants, Yang and Wei, and are corroborated by evidence such as: the defendants' household registration certificates, case acceptance registration forms, case filing decisions, documents related to bail pending trial, documents related to the revocation of bail pending trial, decision for approval of arrest, arrest warrants, and arrest notification documents, testimonies from witnesses Zhong, Zhang, Xu, a statement provided by Zhong Jia (warehouse guard of Jinsha Mobile Company), an explanation from the criminal investigation brigade of the Jinsha County Public Security Bureau, proof from the village committee of Huheyin Village in Xinji Town of a certain city and a disability certificate of Wang, proof from a certain city's detention center, the account of Wei's apprehension document issued by a certain city and Yang's apprehension document issued by Jinsha County Public Security Bureau, a letter of understanding, price certification conclusion and notification documents from the Jinsha County Price Certification Center, and the confessions of the defendants Yang and Wei, which are sufficient to establish these facts.


Upon examination, it was found that on March 20, 2014, at around 16:00, the defendants Zhu and Wang conspired, with Wang first luring the retiree Chen, under the pretense of a massage, to the underground rental room at No. 750 Shuangfeng Avenue, Qianchuan Street, Huangpi District, in a certain city, in front of the Postal Savings Bank. They persuaded Chen to remove his jacket on the pretext of a massage. Zhu then took the opportunity to sneak into the room and stole cash amounting to RMB 4,200 from the pocket of Chen's jacket. During the trial of this case, the relatives of defendants Zhu and Wang returned the stolen money, RMB 4,200, on their behalf. The defendants Zhu and Wang, as well as their defense counsel, raised no objections during the trial to the above facts. The facts were supported by the statement of the victim, Chen; testimonies from witnesses Huang, Xue, Hou, Liu, Luo, Xia, and Tan; train ticket booking information of the defendants Zhu and Wang; the rental agreement; the account of their capture by public security agencies; identification records, including basic information and photos of the persons identified; list of seized items; the criminal judgment by the People's Court of Diecai District, Guilin City, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region; as well as the confessions and defenses of defendants Zhu and Wang. All these pieces of evidence are sufficient to establish the facts.


The People's Procuratorate in a certain location charged that defendant Ding, on May 13, 2014, at approximately 21:00, forcibly demanded that victim He gamble with him in the Mahjong parlor located in the garage at 28 Building 103, Changshan Shibei Village, Chengdong Street, Jiangyin City. After victim He refused, a verbal altercation ensued, and defendants Shi, Ding, and Li beat victim He. During the incident, defendant Shi used a single-edged knife he carried with him to stab victim He in the left shoulder blade area. Subsequently, defendants Ding, Shi, and Li punched and kicked victim Wang, who came to intervene, injuring him. According to forensic identification by the Jiangyin City Public Security Bureau, victim He sustained injuries to his head, neck, and back, resulting in multiple contusions to the soft tissues on the right occipital area, strip abrasions on the right neck, and a 2.3 cm long wound on the left shoulder blade area. Victim Wang sustained injuries to his left eye area, with blunt trauma to the left eye and multiple soft tissue tenderness. The injuries of both individuals constitute minor injuries.


The People’s Procuratorate of a certain district in Guangzhou Municipality charged that on August 4, 2013, at around 9 a.m., the defendants Shen and Long, after conspiring, took a motorcycle ridden by their accomplices "Jiuping" and "Gougulu" to the entrance of a China Mobile Communication business hall on Fengshen Avenue in Xinhua Street, a certain district. Under the pretense of sharing found money, they deceived the victim, Zhou, into going to a nearby section of the road at Fengshen Commune. Subsequently, defendant Long tricked the victim, Zhou, into revealing the bank card password under the guise of checking the balance, and defendant Shen obtained the victim's Industrial and Commercial Bank card (card number ×××4063) by swapping it. Afterward, the two went to an ATM of the Industrial and Commercial Bank on Huagang Avenue and withdrew a total of 10,000 yuan in cash from the bank card. On the morning of October 29, 2013, the defendants Shen and Long were arrested by public security personnel, and all the recovered stolen money has now been returned to the victim.


Upon trial, it is found that between September 2014 and April 2015, the defendants Hu and his wife, the defendant Li, engaged in organizing gambling activities through bullfighting at their shop on Tianlou Street in a certain town in this county, at the home of Qin, and at the place where Jiao's mother lived before her death. They collected a total profit of more than 30,000 yuan from these activities. After the defendants Hu and Li were brought to justice, they returned the illegal earnings of 30,000 yuan. The aforementioned facts were not disputed by the defendants Hu and Li during the court trial, and were corroborated by the testimonies of 29 participants in the gambling, including Zhu and Jia, photos of the gambling locations and tools, the receipt for the returned illegal gains, the description of the case from the Guannan County Public Security Bureau, the documentation of the apprehension process, and the household registration certificate proving the identity of the parties involved. These pieces of evidence are sufficient to confirm the facts.