Li Ning, academician of the Chinese Academy of engineering, embezzled 37.56 million yuan of scientific research fees and was sentenced to 12 years in five trials

category:Hot
 Li Ning, academician of the Chinese Academy of engineering, embezzled 37.56 million yuan of scientific research fees and was sentenced to 12 years in five trials


After the trial, it was found that from July 2008 to February 2012, the defendant Li Ning took advantage of his position as a professor of China Agricultural University, director of the State Key Laboratory of agricultural biotechnology of China Agricultural University, director of the Li Ning research group of School of biology of China Agricultural University, and responsible for the management of a number of national science and technology major special project funds, and the defendant Zhang Lei adopted embezzlement and virtual development By means of tickets, false labor expenditure and other means, the total amount of research funds of the corruption project is more than 37.56 million yuan, of which the other members of the corruption project team are responsible for more than 20.92 million yuan. The above items were transferred by Li Ning and Zhang Lei into the accounts controlled by Li Ning and used for investment in several companies.

According to the intermediate peoples Court of Songyuan City, the defendant Li Ning and Zhang Lei embezzled and defrauded scientific research funds by taking advantage of Li Nings position, with a huge amount. The acts of Li Ning and Zhang Lei have constituted the crime of corruption. In view of the continuous adjustment of the management system of scientific research funds by the state in recent years, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the latest management measures for scientific research funds, combined with the principle of modesty and restraint of criminal law, and based on the highest proportion of the indirect expenses under the names of Li Ning and Zhang Lei, the reduced amount of more than 3.45 million yuan can no longer be evaluated as criminal income, but the amount should still be recognized as illegal income, so the defendant Li Ning Zhang Lei embezzled more than 34.1 million yuan. In the joint crime, Li Ning is the principal offender, with the statutory heavier punishment circumstances, part of the stolen money in this case has been recovered, and Li Ning can be given a lighter punishment as appropriate; Zhang Lei is an accessory, and pleads guilty to repentance, and can be given a lighter punishment according to law. The court rendered the above judgment.

Appendix: about Li Ning and the chief judge of corruption case

1. What is the basis of the courts conviction and sentencing of Li Ning?

Answer: according to the relevant provisions of the criminal law of the peoples Republic of China and the interpretation of the Supreme Peoples court and the Supreme Peoples Procuratorate on Several Issues concerning the application of law in handling criminal cases of corruption and bribery, if the amount of corruption or bribery is more than 3 million, it should be recognized as the amount is particularly huge as stipulated in the first paragraph of article 383 of the criminal law, and be sentenced to more than 10 years of apprenticeship according to law He shall also be fined or sentenced to confiscation of property.

According to the facts found out in the trial of this case, the defendant Li Ning and Zhang Lei embezzled more than 34.1 million yuan after checking and reducing the highest proportion of indirect expenses under the names of Li Ning and Zhang Lei, which belongs to the sentencing range of extremely large amount. In the joint crime, Li Ning is the main culprit of joint corruption, with the statutory heavier punishment circumstances. Part of the stolen money in this case has been recovered, and Li Ning can be given a lighter punishment as appropriate. The court then made the above-mentioned judgment according to law.

2. Question: the trial period of this case is more than 5 years. Is it in line with the law? Why is the case reopened now?

A: the case of embezzlement by the defendants Li Ning and Zhang Lei lasted five years after two trial sessions. It mainly involves the change of criminal law, the adjustment of the amount of crimes in the judicial interpretation of the two high schools in 2016 and the reform of the management system of scientific research funds.

(1) the first paragraph of Article 208 of the criminal procedure law of the peoples Republic of China and the second paragraph of article 173 of the interpretation of the Supreme Peoples Court on the application of the criminal procedure law of the peoples Republic of China clearly stipulate the extension of the trial period. Before the expiration of the trial period of a case, it can be submitted to the higher court of the trial court and the Supreme Peoples court for approval to extend the trial period, which is in full compliance with the law.

(2) this case involves the management and use of scientific research funds, and has a strong policy nature. In order to better serve the national science and technology innovation strategy and maximize the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of scientific and technological personnel, the court has been focusing on the changes in the management and use policies of relevant scientific research funds during the trial process, and has carefully studied the relevant documents of the state and China Agricultural University on the management of scientific research funds. The above factors have been fully considered in the judgment.

(3) in view of the continuous adjustment of the management system of scientific research funds by the state in recent years, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the latest management methods of scientific research funds, combined with the principle of modesty and restraint of criminal law, the embezzlement facts charged by the procuratorial organs are reduced according to the highest proportion of the indirect expenses under the names of Li Ning and Zhang Lei, and the reduced 3.45 million yuan can no longer be used for criminal evaluation, which fully reflects the fact thatu201c From the old and light judicial principle.

3. Q: does Li Nings special status as a scientist in the field of animal transgenic research and his contribution to scientific research have any impact on his conviction and sentencing?

A: the case of Li Nings collusion with Zhang Leis embezzlement is a major, difficult and complex case that was found in the special audit conducted by the state audit office and handed over to the Supreme Peoples Procuratorate for investigation and punishment according to law, and was assigned by the Supreme Peoples court to be tried by the intermediate peoples Court of Songyuan City, Jilin Province.

Chinas criminal law clearly stipulates that anyone who commits a crime shall be equal in the application of law. No privilege beyond the law is allowed. As a academician of the Chinese Academy of engineering, Li Ning is also deeply sorry that he was sentenced for his criminal act. But no matter who violates the law, criminal responsibility should be investigated according to law. No identity can be an excuse to be above or beyond the law. When deciding on a penalty, the court will, in accordance with the facts, nature, circumstances of the crime and the degree of harm to the society, and in accordance with the provisions of the law, comprehensively consider the penalty imposed on it.

4. Is Li Nings crime related to the national scientific research fund management system at that time? Are these factors taken into account in conviction and sentencing?

A: the national scientific research fund management system has been constantly revised and improved in recent years. With the reform of scientific research system, the state has made some relatively loose adjustments to the management and use of scientific research funds, allowing the surplus funds of the project to be used for the direct expenditure of scientific research activities by the project undertaking unit within a certain period of time. But the state has also been strengthening the supervision and management of scientific research funds. First, the national scientific research funds for specific scientific research projects should not be used for other personal projects without authorization, nor allowed to use the national scientific research funds to pay for personal projects. Second, according to the facts and evidence found out in the trial, Li Ning did not invest in self financing for relevant scientific research projects, and all funds involved in the case were from the funds allocated by the state finance. Therefore, Li Nings crime can not be attributed to the perfection of the national scientific research funds management and use system. Third, there are strict approval procedures and management requirements for scientific research funds.

Li Nings criminal behavior is not directly related to the management system of scientific research funds. Up to now, the main purpose of the national scientific research funds management system is to support scientific research and encourage scientific and technological innovation, but it must be managed by the unit as a whole in accordance with the regulations, and there are strict approval procedures, which cannot be used for other purposes, let alone arbitrage. No matter how the management system of scientific research funds is adjusted, the supervision principle does not allow individuals to enrich their own pockets.

5. Q: during the trial, Li Ning insisted that his behavior was not corruption, that the withheld funds were to continue scientific research activities, and that the relevant companies were platform companies set up for the needs of scientific research activities. How does the court determine this?

A: the main purpose of the national allocation of scientific research funds is to provide financial guarantee for the smooth development of scientific research activities, so as to promote the progress and development of science and technology. Scientific research funds come from the relevant departments of the state, which belong to the financial funds and must be used exclusively. After the scientific research funds are allocated to colleges and universities, their property is still state-owned property, not personal property belonging to the person in charge of the research project or the research team. According to the law, the act of embezzling and defrauding scientific research funds constitutes the crime of corruption. Therefore, the purpose of scientific research funds has a clear specificity, and no one is allowed to intercept or withdraw them in any name or in any way for personal use.

According to the whereabouts of the money involved in the case identified in the trial, after Li Ning transferred the money involved into the bank account under his personal control by means of embezzlement, fraud, false invoice and false labor expenditure, most of it was used in Li Nings personal investment company or increased capital and shares. Beijing Quanshun Jieda Technology Co., Ltd. and Wuxi kejienuo Biotechnology Co., Ltd. involved in the case have not engaged in any scientific research activities up to the time of the crime. Moreover, the above-mentioned companies are neither established or authorized by Agricultural University of China, nor are they scientific research platforms designated and approved by Agricultural University of China. Agricultural University of China is not aware of the establishment and investment of the above-mentioned companies.

Part of the money involved in this case is possessed by individuals. According to Wangs testimony presented in court by the procuratorial organ, he is a temporary hired driver of jipulin and jifulin. Zhang Lei once asked him to open a bank card in his own name, which was handed over to oumou, the teller, for the purpose of receiving and paying extra account funds. After the driver resigned, he found that there were more than 600000 yuan in the bank card. Because the company never asked for the money, he used the money to buy financial products and personal consumption.

6. What are the main criminal facts of Li Ning? Is there a case of misappropriation of other peoples scientific research funds?

A: according to the facts found out in the court trial, Li Ning embezzled money, including three parts. One is the money for the elimination of animals and the sale of milk after the experiment, the other is the balance of the project funds under his own name and others name, and the third is the balance of the service fees under his own name and others name. Among them, Li Ning not only embezzled the scientific research funds under his own name, but also used the means of falsely issuing 223 invoices to obtain a large amount of scientific research funds under the name of others, accounting for more than 20.92 million yuan, accounting for 82% of the total amount. For this reason, the procuratorial organ has issued documentary evidence such as reimbursement documents, the testimony of Dai and other witnesses, appraisal opinions and Zhang Leis statements, and has determined that the evidence of the above facts is conclusive.

7. Q: in the trial, Li Ning refused to plead guilty and his defender also defended his innocence. What is the main basis for the court to make a judgment?

A: Article 55 of the criminal procedure law of the peoples Republic of China stipulates that evidence, investigation and research should be emphasized in the sentence of all cases, and oral confession should not be credulous. Only the confession of the defendant, if there is no other evidence, can not be found guilty and punished; without the confession of the defendant, if the evidence is true and sufficient, can be found guilty and punished. In the trial, although Li Ning refused to plead guilty, the procuratorial organ produced a lot of evidence, including the clear and stable confession of Zhang Lei, the defendant in the same case, the testimony of two tellers of Li Ning Company and many other witnesses, as well as the relevant documentary evidence for withdrawing funds. The evidence can be verified with each other and coincide with the expert opinion of judicial accounting. The court then made the above-mentioned judgment according to law. In the trial of this case, Li Ning refused to plead guilty. The court respected and guaranteed the litigation rights of Li Ning and his defenders, and fully listened to their opinions.

8. Who attended the hearing?

A: this case will be heard in public on December 30, 2019. During the trial, the intermediate peoples Court of Songyuan City, Jilin Province invited representatives of the National Peoples Congress, Jilin Province and Songyuan City, members of the CPPCC, some media reporters, some representatives of the academic community and the grassroots people to attend the trial. At the same time, the close relatives of the defendants Li Ning and Zhang Lei and representatives of Agricultural University of China attended the on-site audience. Public sentencing on January 3, 2020.

(function() {vars = + Math. Domain(). ToString (36). Slice (2); document. Write (< divstyle = id = + S + > < / div > ); (window. Slotbydup = window. Slotbydup| []). Push ({ID: u5811557, container: s});});)); source of this article: CCTV news client responsibility editor: Zhou Xinyi