On April 23, 2019, court of people of Shu in relief county is made (2019) revive 1322 department punish fines decision book 18 numbers, the action that decides false to party armed police statement fines 20000 yuan. Report details of a case as follows now:
By condemnatory person condition
By condemnatory person: Armed police, male, was born on December 18, 1995, the Han nationality, person of Shu in relief county, dweller, live town of temple of dragon of Shu in relief county is resided jointly appoint meeting.
Basic details of a case
The 4 accuser such as Hu Mou orchid relate issue of liability of accident of traffic of motor vehicle of the accused armed police, Li Mou benevolence one case, the accused armed police drove on September 17, 2016 small-sized passenger car produces traffic accident, the registering car of this car advocate the uncle that is an armed police Li Mou benevolence, did not cast protect make strong narrow pass (4 accuser ask because of this Li Mou benevolence assumes corresponding and civil responsibility) . Front courtyard careful is medium on December 14, 2016, the armed police weighs of the same age Li Mou benevolence will sell an armed police experience case car with 35000 yuan on September 14, signed written agreement, its give pay Li Mou benevolence 35000 yuan of cash, li Mou benevolence issued receipt to its. The armed police asks its father comes home on the court find receipt to be handed in to this academy. This academy attune takes public security dossier to find out, the armed police weighs his when public security mechanism is interrogatory from Li Mou on September 15, 2016 benevolence place buys a car, car section 35000 yuan outstanding, its to Li Mou benevolence issue a bill signed in acknowledgement of debt. Hind this academy will talk with the armed police on December 29 at of the same age, the contradictory place of the about car business course allegation in asking its reach process of front courtyard careful to investigating makes logical explanation, its did not make logical explanation. The armed police in the talk says again, on September 14, 2016 its and Li Mou benevolence sign an agreement only, li Mou benevolence did not hit receipt, without other any written formalities, also do not have other at that time attendant. Front courtyard careful is medium on January 10, 2017, the husband's younger sister that Li Mou benevolence weighs to its hit 35000 yuan receipt to give an armed police at that time and him armed police is attendant, the armed police gives to this approbate. When the court shows the receipt that its father refers to the armed police, its give again to the authenticity of this receipt approbate, but the place with abhorrent to its around allegation armed police did not make any explanations.
Handle a result
The accused armed police exists to be in great contradiction more apparently to the allegation around of car business course, and its all cannot make logical explanation to this, should maintain armed police and Li Mou benevolence between the fact of nonexistent car business. This academy thinks, the accused armed police makes false statement intentionally in process of front courtyard careful, the honest honor that its behavior violates civil suit to should be abided by apparently this one important principle, obstructive and normal judicatory order, should give lawfully punish. According to " code of civil law of People's Republic of China " thirteenth the first, the 111st the first the first, the 115th the first, the 116th the first paragraph, the 3rd regulation, the decision fines 20000 yuan to party armed police.
