The word

Respected judge, jury:

As the Luoyang tunnel machinery limited company commissioned by the plaintiff's litigation agent, on the basis of the facts of the case and with the provisions of relevant laws, the opinions are as follows:

One, the original, the two sides signed the contract valid, binding on both parties.

In July 10, 2010, the original, the two sides signed the contract, is the true meaning of the two sides, and the contract is not in violation of mandatory provisions of Chinese laws and administrative regulations, subject qualification qualification. Therefore, according to the provisions of China's "general principles of civil law" in article fifty-fifth, the two sides signed the contract act in line with the civil legal acts constituting elements, the contract valid, legally binding on the parties shall.

Two, the defendant owed the plaintiff custom processing cost clear facts, is sufficient to recognize.

First, the plaintiff fulfill the contract obligations of the facts are clear, is sufficient to recognize. In July 10, 2010, in order to iron in Tai Hing railway Xuanquan temple and Bai Ya tou tunnel engineering hydraulic lining trolley, the original, the defendant signed the processing contract a contract, agreed by the plaintiff for the construction design and processing of lining trolley, the defendant to pay the corresponding fees. After signing the contract, the plaintiff fulfill the design, processing and delivery obligations, the defendant to be recognized and received. In fact, not only have a written contract signed by both parties and the handover procedures can support, but the defendant has no objection. Therefore, the plaintiff fulfill the obligations and delivered for crop processing to the fact that the people's court should be enough.

Secondly, the defendant owed the plaintiff custom processing cost clear facts, is sufficient to recognize. The plaintiff to the defendant each delivered for crops, providing both defendants pound list and other procedures that crop number plaintiff delivered, and according to the two sides signed the contract on the unit and each provide vouchers and the two sides in court reconciled record, can see the defendant did not all the payment obligation, the plaintiff to deal with arrears the outstanding purchase price and the facts are clear, is enough to be recognized by the people's court.

Three, the plaintiff demands according to law, to match the reality, should be supported by the people's court.

China's "contract law" the 263rd stipulation: "the hirer shall pay the remuneration in accordance with the agreed time limit. Where the time of payment is not agreed or the agreement is not clear, nor can it be determined in accordance with the provisions of this Law in article sixty-first, the hirer shall pay the contractor delivers work; work is partially delivered, the hirer shall make payment accordingly." The original, the accused the two sides signed the "contract" eighth agreement, the defendant shall in each car to the site, installed 30 days after 15 days or receipt, and 180 days using three lining loop or receipt to fulfill the corresponding obligation of payment in. Visible, according to the provisions of the law and the contract, the defendant should be in the above time nodes on the plaintiff to fulfill the corresponding obligation of payment, but the defendant failed to strictly follow the time node to perform the payment obligation, formed on the payment in arrears.

To sum up, the above facts and law, appeal, according to law, to match the reality, should be supported by the people's court.

Four, the plaintiffs in the prosecution of legitimate and effective, is a concentrated expression of the will and interests of the company, the defendant shall delegate to the lawsuit settlement personnel according to law the plaintiff to pay off the debts.

The plaintiffs in this lawsuit, plaintiff company most shareholders decision, is a concentrated expression of the will of the company. At the same time, the plaintiff's prosecution is to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the company, in accordance with the overall interests of the company. And, the plaintiff to the court to provide all the necessary legal prosecution materials should be submitted to the court. The authorized agent, the plaintiff shall issue a letter of authorization, and stamped with the company legal seal to prove the authenticity and legitimacy of the authorization. Therefore, the defendant did not provide enough to deny the other agent identity legitimacy to the court, the defendant to the plaintiff, the prosecution should delegate or agent assigned personnel to fulfill the repayment obligations.

In summary, the plaintiff the prosecution facts, legal and reasonable, is a concentrated expression of the plaintiff company will, the court should support the plaintiff asked the defendant to fulfil repayment claims.

Agency comments posted above, if there is no wrong, please the collegial panel to consider and adopt.

Thank you.

                         Agent: Henan Senhe law firm

                                  Zhao Tingxu

                                 December 5, 2011

The court of Appeals for the District Court of Taiyuan City, acting lawyer Zhao Tingxu Tel: 13403792776, QQ812925850,