The wrong decision of the senior executives is also classified as Lao Lai court.

category:Society click:357
 The wrong decision of the senior executives is also classified as Lao Lai court.


Recently, Mr. Shen of Pizhou, Jiangsu Province, unexpectedly found himself involved in an Oolong lawsuit, but he had to pay for the wrong judgment of the court - he became the so-called Lao Lai and was listed in the bad credit record for the above reasons, he was refused by the bank in handling the loan.

After the media exposure, the latest progress is welcome. On September 14, Shen Lei told Peng Mei News that on the morning of the same day, the court concerned and the court of Yunlong District in Xuzhou City had explained the reasons and apologized to Mr. Shen through lawyers. Before, the relevant judicial documents made by the court have been withdrawn from the Chinese judicial documents online. Shens lawyer has also received a civil ruling on the courts retrial error correction.

Xuzhou Yunlong District Court also said on the 14th, in response to the incident arousing social concern, the court quickly convened a special study of the meeting, decided to order the case in charge of leaders and relevant responsible persons to immediately apologize to the parties, withdraw the judgment documents published by China Judicial Documents Network, start the trial supervision process to correct the case. At the same time, the plaintiff who provides false information to obstruct the action will be punished, and the procedure of prosecuting the responsible person will be started.

Xuzhou Yunlong District Court also said that, at the same time, the court has carried out self-examination and rectification, improve the system, strengthen training, strict management, to prevent the recurrence of similar situations.

All the pictures in the civil judgment are from purple bull news.

Senior executives are inexplicable as old Lai

Mr. Shen, a native of Pizhou, went out to work in 2002. After more than 10 years of struggle, he has now become an executive of a construction company in Qingdao. In September 3rd this year, something strange happened.

According to Ziniu News of Yangtze Evening News, Mr. Shen was refused a loan by the bank because he had a bad credit record and failed to fulfill the courts effective judgment.

I value the personal credit record most, so many years never involved in any litigation, how to become adishonestperson. Mr. Shen told purple bull news that the banks reply made him confused. After several rounds, he finally found this bad credit record.

Originally, Mr. Shen was sent to court by Zhou because of a dispute over the sale and purchase contract. On March 14 this year, Xuzhou Yunlong District Court ruled that Mr. Shen paid the plaintiff a certain amount per week and was liable for breach of contract. Within 10 days from the effective date of the judgment, Mr. Shen paid the plaintiff 4500 yuan per week and the bank interest. Later, the court system was regarded as the executor because it failed to perform the judgment.

According to the Ziniu news report, Shen Lei read the judgment repeatedly and found that the content of the judgment had nothing to do with his business. The original request is for the footwear business to cause disputes, but I have never involved in this business. More importantly, he did not have any intersection with the plaintiff Zhou.

In the end, Mr. Shen confirmed to plaintiff Zhous lawyer and executive judge that he was wrongly accused by the plaintiff.

Executive order

The Court confirmed that the decision was wrong and decided to retry it.

According to Ziniu News, on Sept. 10, Mr. Shens record in the case was also available on the China Judicial Documents Network. All of them were the first instance verdict of a dispute over an installment sale contract between Zhou and Shen, dated December 29, 2015, September 6, 2017, and March 14, 2018, respectively. The first two rulings were withdrawn by the plaintiff.

Then, Mr. Shen is not the real defendant in the above case. Why is he finally old Lai? Xuzhou Yunlong District Court Cheng Judge in November 2017 issued a case service after explanation, solved the mystery.

The statement said that Zhou had complained of a dispute over the sale and purchase contract of Mr. Shen, which had been withdrawn two times. At the time of the first prosecution, the court sent the legal documents to the defendant, Mr. Shen, by express mail. The message was returned after the original address was not found.

In the second case, the court staff served legal documents directly to Mr. Shens residence, but no one was in his home. After understanding, Shen Lei went out to work in Qingdao and asked about the foreign address.

By the time of the third prosecution, the court called Mr. Shens two telephone numbers, all of which had not been informed. According to the purple bull news, the two phone numbers are not Mr. Shens.

Mr. Shen believes that eventually, because the court verifies the identity of the parties there is a mistake, leading to the case in the case without Mr. Shens knowledge, court, judgment, execution, so that it becomes the unfortunate Lao Lai. After the incident, the Xuzhou Yunlong court launched the error correction procedure. On September 14, Peng Mei news reporter inquired the referee document network and found that the three legal referee documents involving Mr. Shen had been withdrawn. The civil ruling issued by the Yunlong District Court of Xuzhou City shows that the court has initiated the trial supervision procedure. The president submitted the case to the trial committee for discussion and concluded that the above-mentioned case was indeed wrong and should be retried. During the retrial in Yunlong Court, the plaintiff, Zhou Mou, believed that Mr. Shen was not the actual debtor and that the defendant had made a mistake in suing him. He applied to the court for withdrawal of the suit. Finally, the court revoked the above judgment. Xuzhou Yunlong District Court also said that the plaintiff Zhou provide false information to obstruct the action of punishment, the start of the relevant responsibility for the proceedings. The source of this article: surging news editor: Zhao Yaping _NN9005

After the incident, the Xuzhou Yunlong court launched the error correction procedure. On September 14, Peng Mei news reporter inquired the referee document network and found that the three legal referee documents involving Mr. Shen had been withdrawn.

The civil ruling issued by the Yunlong District Court of Xuzhou City shows that the court has initiated the trial supervision procedure. The president submitted the case to the trial committee for discussion and concluded that the above-mentioned case was indeed wrong and should be retried. During the retrial in Yunlong Court, the plaintiff, Zhou Mou, believed that Mr. Shen was not the actual debtor and that the defendant had made a mistake in suing him. He applied to the court for withdrawal of the suit. Finally, the court revoked the above judgment.

Xuzhou Yunlong District Court also said that the plaintiff Zhou provide false information to obstruct the action of punishment, the start of the relevant responsibility for the proceedings.