Why does Tencent succeed in freezing tens of millions of property of Laoganma?

category:Hot
 Why does Tencent succeed in freezing tens of millions of property of Laoganma?


The above-mentioned application was approved by the court, and the date of settlement of the ruling is April 24, 2020.

However, on the evening of June 30, Laoganma issued a statement saying that the company received relevant legal documents on June 10, after verification, our company has never signed a joint marketing cooperation agreement with Tencent or authorized others with Tencent on the brand of Laoganma, and we have never conducted any commercial cooperation with Tencent.

On July 1, Guiyang public security Shuanglong branch further informed the case and identified the incident as three suspects forged the official seal of Lao Ganma, pretended to cooperate with Tencent and defrauded Tencent game gift bag. After that, the above-mentioned property preservation application for freezing Laoganmas assets of 16 million became particularly embarrassing.

One of the focuses of external query is how Tencent successfully applied for the ruling of freezing the assets of Lao Ganma of more than 16 million yuan? Facing such a national brand of Laoganma and a dispute of tens of millions of yuan, is it necessary for Tencent to apply for property preservation and whether there is excessive force? As the object of property preservation, why did Lao Ganma not have the opportunity to defend, but received relevant legal documents on June 10?

According to the interview of surging journalists, property preservation before litigation refers to a property preservation measure adopted by the peoples court before litigation if the interested party fails to apply for property preservation immediately because of the emergency situation, which will cause irreparable damage to their legitimate rights and interests.

Ji Yufeng, a partner of Huiye law firm, told the surging news reporter: generally speaking, it is a procedure in which the plaintiff worries about the transfer of property by the defendant or that the property status of the defendant may deteriorate and endanger the execution in the future, so the plaintiff first applies to the court to seal up, detain and freeze the defendants property.

So, in the face of Laoganma, a well-known and normal business enterprise, is it necessary for Tencent to apply for property preservation before litigation?

In this regard, Tencent did not make further explanation. However, lawyers mentioned that in practice, pre litigation property preservation can also be used to exert pressure on the party to be preserved. For example, Ji Yufeng said, for example, ship arrest, which is common in maritime disputes, is to use the means of property preservation (ship arrest) before litigation to force the other party to provide guarantee or be forced to negotiate and settle in order to reduce the loss (ship demurrage is very expensive every day).

As for the phenomenon that Lao Ganma seems to be in the dark in this incident, Yu Chao, a lawyer from Beijing law firm in Shanghai, told surging journalists that the purpose of preservation is to prevent the defendant from transferring property in the process of litigation. After the judgment takes effect, there is no executable property, so the court can not contact the defendant.

Its easy to understand that if the judge contacts the other party and the other party transfers a sum of money, the judge will be baffled: is it because of the judges telephone that the other party transferred the property? Therefore, to accuse the judge of not verifying with the respondent in advance is a lack of understanding of practice. Ji Yufeng lawyer said.

Ji Yufeng analysis, the court at this stage is not the substantive review of the trial stage, but the procedural review, whether the application items on the application form conform to the legal provisions.

Ji Yufeng said that in practice, in order to avoid some litigation participants cheating on pre litigation property preservation with false evidence, Chinas law has also set the corresponding threshold and stipulated the corresponding criminal and civil liabilities. In case of loss caused by the wrong preservation, the respondent shall have the right to claim compensation from the applicant.

Heres a detailed explanation of lawyers:

1. What is pre litigation property preservation?

Generally speaking, it is a kind of procedure in which the plaintiff first applies to the court to seal up, detain and freeze the defendants property, because he is worried that the defendants property will be transferred, or that the defendants property may deteriorate and endanger the future execution. After the completion of the preservation procedure, the applicant (plaintiff) shall file a lawsuit within the prescribed time. If the plaintiff does not sue, the property preservation measures shall be lifted.

Ji Yufeng said that pre litigation property preservation is fast, timely and simple. According to the civil procedure law, the peoples court shall make a ruling within 48 hours and start to implement the application. This can more completely avoid the economic losses of the interested parties due to disputes. Although the law stipulates that the enforcement should be started within 48 hours, due to various factors, such as the lack of information on the property of the respondent provided by the applicant, the shortage of staff of the executive board, and the need to apply for approval for execution in other places, in practice, the starting time of execution in many courts will be more than 48 hours.

2. Does the court need to contact the defendant? Is there any obligation to verify the authenticity of materials?

Teng Yun, senior partner of Zhonglun Wende law firm, said that the court would not contact the defendant before making a civil ruling on property preservation and in the process of implementing property preservation.

Yu Chao, a lawyer from Jingheng law firm in Shanghai, told surging journalists that the purpose of preservation is to prevent the defendant from transferring property in the process of litigation. After the judgment takes effect, there will be no executable property, so the court can not contact the defendant.

Lawyer Ji Yufeng also said that in practice, once the defendant is contacted, the defendant is likely to be aware of the transfer of property.

Its easy to understand that if the judge contacts the other party and the other party transfers a sum of money, the judge will be baffled: is it because of the judges telephone that the other party transferred the property?

Therefore, to accuse the judge of not verifying with the respondent in advance is a lack of understanding of practice. Ji Yufeng lawyer said.

But in the dispute between Tencent and Laoganma, the complicated factor is that Tencent cooperates with a fake old Ganma. According to Laoganma, Laoganma was informed of relevant matters and called the police only after receiving the civil ruling from the court in June.

The official wechat official account of Guiyang public security Shuanglong Branch issued a notice on July 1. After preliminary investigation, it was found that the suspects Cao Mou (male, 36 years old), Liu Dali (female, 40 years old) and Zheng Mou Jun (female, 37 years old) forged the seal of Laoganma company, pretended to be the manager of the companys marketing department, and signed a cooperation agreement with Tencent.

In other words, the cooperation agreement between Tencent and Laoganma is stamped with a false seal. Then, is the court obliged to examine the authenticity of the cooperation contract before making a decision to approve the application for property preservation?

In this regard, lawyer Ji Yufeng said that what the court carried out at this stage was not the substantive review at the trial stage, but the procedural review. What needs to be examined is: whether the materials are complete and meet the requirements; whether the application items on the application form conform to the legal provisions; whether the form of the evidence materials (often copies) submitted by the applicant is in compliance; whether the evidence materials can initially support it Application items. Once the above conditions are reached, the Executive Board of the court shall order preservation in accordance with the provisions.

The determination of the three characteristics of evidence (authenticity, legality and relevance) is ultimately determined by the judges of the trial court when conducting substantive trials. When applying for pre litigation property preservation, such requirements cannot be made to the court.

Specifically, in this case, the judges of the filing and enforcement courts are not able to identify whether it is a carrot in 48 hours. As long as they see that there is a sealed document, which is the seal of Lao Ganma, and the content can support the description in the application, they have completed the form examination. As to whether this chapter is a radish chapter, it is up to the judges and the police of the trial court to find out.

3. What to do about frozen wrong?

Now the embarrassment is that Tencent probably learned that it was cheated only after the application for property preservation was approved. As a result, the ruling on property preservation is particularly embarrassing - how to cancel it? Does Tencent need to compensate Laoganma?

According to Yu Chao, interested parties of the property to be preserved may apply to the court to cancel the preservation if they think that the preservation is improper or wrong.

Lawyer Ji Yufeng said that in practice, in order to avoid some litigants cheating on pre litigation property preservation with false evidence, Chinas law has also set corresponding thresholds and stipulated corresponding criminal and civil liabilities. For example, to apply for property preservation before litigation, it is necessary to submit a guarantee or letter of guarantee that meets the requirements of the court, so as to prevent the respondent from having no money to pay for the loss caused by the wrong application; those who provide false evidence to defraud the preservation ruling may be suspected of criminal charges of false litigation; once the wrong preservation results in the loss of the respondent, the respondent has the right to claim compensation from the applicant.

The following is the time line of the tease goose injustice event sorted out by the surging journalists:

April 24th

The peoples Court of Nanshan District, Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province issued a civil ruling, approving the plaintiff Tencents application for property preservation, sealing up and freezing the bank deposits worth 16.2406 million yuan in the names of the defendants Guiyang Nanming Laoganma flavor food sales Co., Ltd. and Guiyang Nanming Laoganma flavor food sales Co., Ltd., or other properties of equivalent value.

June 30th

Tencent explained the dispute between the two sides, saying that the matter was that Lao Ganma put in tens of millions of yuan of advertising in Tencent, but ignored the long-term default of the contract, Tencent was forced to sue in accordance with the law and apply for asset preservation, and the court ruled to freeze the other partys enterprise account.

Tencent said that in March 2019, Tencent and Laoganma signed a joint marketing cooperation agreement, in which Tencents resources were used for the promotion of Laoganma hot pepper series. Tencent has fulfilled the relevant obligations as agreed, but Laoganma has not paid in accordance with the contract. Tencent repeatedly urged no results, so it had to sue in accordance with the law. At present, the case is in the specific trial process of the court.

June 30th

According to the first financial report, the person in charge of Laoganma responded: Tencent was cheated!

In a statement later issued by Laoganma, Laoganma said: on June 10, the company received the relevant legal documents to be served by Guiyang Nanming District Peoples court entrusted by Nanshan District Peoples Court of Shenzhen. Tencent sued Laoganma and applied for property preservation on the ground of service contract dispute. After receiving the above-mentioned documents, the company attached great importance to it and immediately carried out an investigation. After verification, our company has never signed a joint marketing cooperation agreement with Tencent or authorized others with Tencent on the brand of Laoganma , and we have never conducted any commercial cooperation with Tencent.

July 1st

The official wechat official account of Guiyang public security Shuanglong Branch issued a police notice: Recently, the Bureau received a report from Guiyang Nanming Laoganma Flavor Food Co., Ltd. that some illegal personnel signed a cooperation agreement with Shenzhen Tencent computer system Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Tencent company) in the name of Guiyang Nanming Laoganma Flavor Food Co., Ltd., which led to a lawsuit by Tencent.

(function(){( window.slotbydup=window .slotbydup||[]).push({id:u5811557,container:ssp_ 5811557, async:true });})(); After preliminary investigation, the suspects were Cao (male, 36), Liu (40), Zheng (37), who forged the seal of Laoganma company, pretended to be the manager of marketing department of the company, and signed a cooperation agreement with Tencent. The purpose was to obtain the online game gift package code given by Tencent company in the promotion activities, and then sold it illegally through the Internet Gain economic benefits. At present, Cao and other three people have been detained for suspected crimes, and the case is under further processing. On July 1, Tencent responded to being cheated on its official microblog, saying: its hard to say In order to prevent similar incidents from happening again, the majority of netizens are welcome to provide similar clues and leave messages through comments or private messages. We paid our own pocket and prepared 1000 bottles of Laoganma as a reward, which also contained limited edition of orphans. Tencent has a picture of Laoganma hot sauce, and the bottle shows the cooperation pattern of QQ flying car and Laoganma. Godmother godmother, make complaints about the 1000 bottles of chili sauce on the shelves of the extended reading shop. It is not related to the search engine of the old godmother. The search volume increased by 407%. Jingdong sold out: the goose hard money byte runaway executive Tucao Tencent: did not check the public inspection method clearly. NBJ11145

After preliminary investigation, the suspects were Cao (male, 36), Liu (40), Zheng (37), who forged the seal of Laoganma company, pretended to be the manager of marketing department of the company, and signed a cooperation agreement with Tencent. The purpose was to obtain the online game gift package code given by Tencent company in the promotion activities, and then sold it illegally through the Internet Gain economic benefits.

At present, Cao and other three people have been detained for suspected crimes, and the case is under further processing.

July 1st

Tencent said in its official microblog response to the cheated incident: its hard to say In order to prevent similar incidents from happening again, the majority of netizens are welcome to provide similar clues and leave messages through comments or private messages. We paid our own pocket and prepared 1000 bottles of Laoganma as a reward, which also contained limited edition of orphans.

Tencent has a picture of Laoganma hot sauce, and the bottle shows the cooperation pattern of QQ flying car and Laoganma.