Wumart Group Zhang Wenzhong was acquitted in retrial! Previously, the ＂three crimes＂ were overturned.

　　Cctv newsThe Supreme People’s Court publicly pronounced the retrial of Zhang Wenzhong case. Defendant Zhang Wenzhong in the original trial was not guilty, defendant Zhang Weichun in the original trial was not guilty, and defendant Wumart Holding Group Co., Ltd. in the original trial was not guilty. The fines executed in the original trial and the recovered property shall be returned according to law. You may not be familiar with Zhang Wenzhong, the defendant in the original trial, but when it comes to Wumart Group, the defendant in the original trial, many people are quite familiar with it. Wumart is the earliest supermarket chain in Beijing and the first private retail enterprise listed in Hongkong, and Zhang Wenzhong is its founder.

　　It is such a private entrepreneur. In March 2009, he was sentenced to 12 years in prison by the Higher People’s Court of Hebei Province for fraud, unit bribery and misappropriation of funds. His sentence was commuted twice, and he was released in February 2013. Today, Zhang Wenzhong was acquitted by the Supreme People’s Court. What the hell is going on here?

　　News background: The whole story of Zhang Wenzhong case.

　　Let’s take a look at Zhang Wenzhong, the former chairman of Wumart Group, from being sentenced to prison to retrial.

　　On December 7, 2006, Zhang Wenzhong was criminally detained by the People’s Procuratorate of Hengshui City, Hebei Province on suspicion of bribery and misappropriation of public funds.

　　On December 25th, 2007, the People’s Procuratorate of Hengshui City, Hebei Province filed a public prosecution with the Intermediate People’s Court of Hengshui City. Accused the defendant Zhang Wenzhong of committing fraud, unit bribery and embezzlement.

　　On October 9, 2008, the Intermediate People’s Court of Hengshui City, Hebei Province made a first-instance judgment, and sentenced Zhang Wenzhong to 15 years’ imprisonment for fraud and fined 500,000 yuan, three years’ imprisonment for bribery by a company, one year’s imprisonment for misappropriation of funds, 18 years’ imprisonment and a fine of 500,000 yuan. After the verdict, Zhang Wenzhong appealed.

　　On March 30th, 2009, the Higher People’s Court of Hebei Province made a final judgment, and found Zhang Wenzhong guilty of fraud. He was sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment and fined 500,000 yuan, together with the crimes of bribery and misappropriation of funds committed by his unit. He decided to execute 12 years’ imprisonment and fined 500,000 yuan.

　　Zhang Wenzhong was released on February 6, 2013 after his sentence was commuted twice. Subsequently, Zhang Wenzhong filed a complaint with Hebei High Court, which rejected the complaint in December 2015. In October 2016, Zhang Wenzhong filed a complaint with the Supreme People’s Court.

　　After review, the Supreme People’s Court decided to remand the case of Zhang Wenzhong on December 27th, 2017. On February 12, 2018, the trial was held in public and the opinions of the defense and the prosecution were heard.

　　The court of first instance found Zhang Wenzhong guilty of "three crimes"

　　At that time, the Higher People’s Court of Hebei Province sentenced Zhang Wenzhong for three crimes: fraud, unit bribery and misappropriation of funds.

　　With regard to the crime of fraud, Wumart Group declared the discount project of national debt technical reform in 2002. The court of first instance held that Wumart Group, as a private enterprise, did not belong to the scope supported by the discount interest funds for national debt technical transformation. Zhang Wenzhong knowingly pretended Wumart Group as a subsidiary of a state-owned enterprise for the purpose of illegal possession, and defrauded the discount interest funds for national debt technical transformation by reporting false projects, which constituted a crime of fraud.

　　With regard to the crime of unit bribery, the court of first instance held that Wumart Group and Zhang Wenzhong violated state regulations in the process of acquiring 50 million shares of Taikang Company, giving state staff a benefit fee of 300,000 yuan and 5 million yuan respectively, which constituted the crime of unit bribery.

　　As for the crime of misappropriating funds, the court of first instance held that Zhang Wenzhong colluded with others and used the convenience of others’ position to misappropriate Taikang Company’s funds for personal use, making a profit of more than 10 million yuan in stock trading, which constituted an accomplice in the crime of misappropriating funds.

　　Zhang Wenzhong’s "three crimes" were all overturned.

　　Now the Supreme People’s Court retries the Zhang Wenzhong case, and these three charges have just been overturned.

　　The Supreme People’s Court, after retrial, thinks that Wumart Group has adjusted the discount policy of national debt technical transformation when it applied for the discount project of national debt technical transformation, private enterprises have the qualification to apply, and the logistics projects and information projects declared by Wumart Group belong to the key support objects of national debt technical transformation discount, which is in line with the national economic development situation and industrial policies at that time. Zhang Wenzhong and Zhang Weichun, the defendants in the original trial, did not commit the fraud of fabricating facts and concealing the truth to defraud the discount funds for the technological transformation of national debt, although they violated the rules in the process of applying for the project by Wumart Group. They did not have the subjective intention of illegally occupying the discount funds for the technological transformation of national debt, which did not meet the constitutive requirements of the crime of fraud. Therefore, the original judgment found that Zhang Wenzhong and Zhang Weichun’s behavior constituted a crime of fraud, which was an error in ascertaining the facts and applying the law, and should be corrected according to law.

　　Wumei Group, the defendant in the original trial, gave Zhao a 300,000 yuan benefit fee after acquiring the shares of Taikang Company held by China Travel Service Headquarters, not for seeking illegitimate interests, nor did it belong to the serious circumstances, which did not meet the constitutive requirements of the unit bribery crime; In the process of acquiring the shares of Taikang Company held by Yuecai Company, Liang did not provide help to Wumart Group, and Wumart Group did not get illegitimate benefits. After the two parties signed the equity transfer agreement, Zhang Wenzhong did not pay Liang 5 million yuan. Wumart Group’s behavior did not constitute the crime of unit bribery, and Zhang Wenzhong, as the directly responsible person in charge of Wumart Group, should not be investigated for criminal responsibility for unit bribery. Therefore, the original judgment found that the actions of Wumart Group and Zhang Wenzhong constituted the crime of unit bribery, which was an error in ascertaining the facts and applying the law and should be corrected according to law.

　　The fact that Zhang Wenzhong misappropriated funds for personal use and personal gain was unclear and the evidence was insufficient. Therefore, the original judgment found that Zhang Wenzhong’s behavior constituted the crime of misappropriating funds, which was an error in ascertaining the facts and applying the law, and should be corrected according to law.

　　State compensation and other work will be started according to law.

　　Zhang Wenzhong, the former chairman of Wumart Group, was acquitted after retrial. It is reported that the follow-up work of the case, such as state compensation, executed fines and the return of recovered property, will be started according to law.

　　Zhang Wenzhong case is the first case involving property rights and entrepreneurs’ wrongs retried in the Supreme People’s Court under the background of comprehensively administering the country according to law and strengthening the protection of property rights and entrepreneurs’ rights and interests. As Zhang Wenzhong said, this case reflects the firm determination of the CPC Central Committee to protect property rights and the legitimate rights and interests of entrepreneurs. It is conducive to further enhancing the sense of security of entrepreneurs’ personal, property and wealth, so that entrepreneurs can operate with peace of mind, invest with peace of mind and concentrate on starting a business.