Reeducation through labor administrative litigation cases

Zhou Mingchuan adapted from the Law Library

Mesh Record

 

The plaintiff and the defendant in the original instance Miao XX Shanghai City Management Committee of reeducation through labor administrative reeducation through labor force1

-- Anhui province Chaohu City Intermediate People's Court (2010-6-7) 1

Yellow XX v. Shanghai Municipal Management Committee of reeducation through labor administrative enforcement and administrative compensation case. 5

-- Anhui province Chaohu City Intermediate People's Court (2010-5-26) 5

Wang Mingdong v. Shanghai Municipal Management Committee of reeducation through labor administrative reeducation through labor decision. 8 case

-- the Anhui Provincial Higher People's Court (2010-1-29) 8

Shandong province Jining City reeducation through labor management committee v. Lu Jiaoni refuses to accept the decision of reeducation through labor11

-- Shaoyang province Hunan City Intermediate People's Court (2009-3-27) 11

The people's Government of Chongqing City, the East China Sea Peng v. reeducation through labor management committee in 13 case

-- the Chongqing first intermediate people's Court (2008-11-18) 13

Xu Jingquan v. Shenyang Municipal Commission of reeducation through labor decision of reeducation through labor 18 case

-- Liaoning province Shenyang City Intermediate People's Court (2008-4-15) 18

Hou Guiyuan was the appellant Shenyang reeducation through Labor Management Committee decision of reeducation through labor case for V.21

-- Liaoning province Shenyang City Intermediate People's Court (2008-4-14) 21

Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee and the China light ray, Xiao Jiapin, Xiao Pengfei, the decision of reeducation through labor25

-- the Chongqing second intermediate people's Court (2008-2-28) 25

The appellant and appellee Xu Qiyong Chongqing Wanzhou reeducation through labor drug management administrative compensation case32

-- the Chongqing second intermediate people's Court (2007-7-30) 32

He Qing v. Dongguan City reeducation through labor management committee of reeducation through labor administrative compulsory appeal case. 34

Guangdong Province -- Foshan City Intermediate People's Court (2006-6-5) 34

Zhang Guojian v. Dongguan City reeducation through labor management committee of reeducation through labor administrative appeal case. 37

Guangdong Province -- Foshan City Intermediate People's Court (2006-6-5) 37

Reeducation through labor, Xu Songyan v. Foshan Shunde reeducation through labor management committee decided in 40 case

Guangdong Province -- Foshan City Intermediate People's Court (2004-7-12) 40

Zhou Wenzhong v. Foshan reeducation through labor management committee administrative punishment case. 42

Guangdong Province -- Foshan City Intermediate People's Court (2003-11-18) 42

What super v. Liuzhou Municipal Commission of reeducation through labor case. 46

-- the Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region Liuzhou City Intermediate People's Court (2002-3-14) 46

Zhang Zhongxiao is not because of the reeducation through labor in Daqing City Management Committee of reeducation through labor decision. 49 case

-- Heilongjiang province Daqing City Intermediate People's Court (2002-3-20) 49

The people's government Foshan Zhang Qiwei v. Board of reeducation through labor decision of reeducation through labor51

Guangdong Province -- Foshan City Intermediate People's Court (2003-3-12) 51

 

The plaintiff and the defendant in the original instance Miao XX Shanghai City Management Committee of reeducation through labor administrative reeducation through labor force

-- Anhui province Chaohu City Intermediate People's Court (2010-6-7)

Anhui province Chaohu City Intermediate People's court

Administrative judgment

(2010) the nest to end the word no. fifteenth

The appellant (defendant in the original instance): Shanghai City reeducation through labor management committee, Shanghai city Huangpu District residence Fuzhou Road No. 185.

Legal representative: Wu barracks, chairman of the committee.

Appellee (the plaintiff): contralateral XX, male. (omitted)

Attorney: Chen XX. (omitted)

The plaintiff and the defendant in the original instance Miao XX Shanghai City Management Committee of reeducation through labor administrative reeducation through labor force case, Chaohu City Juchao District People's court made in January 29, 2010 (2009) nesting method at the beginning of the word no. fiftieth administrative judgment. After the verdict, the Shanghai Municipal Labor Education Management Committee, to appeal to the court. This court formed a collegiate bench trial of the case. Now the trial has been closed.

Miu XX claimed: the unit colleague Li Ming have been Shanghai Pacific Housing Services Limited (Shanghai Pacifi Corp) employees beating, the unit leadership to find a Pacifi Corp, the company was closed, avoid meeting, out of anger, the company leadership and command the plaintiff attendance smashed Pacifi Corp glass, computer and other items to xiesifen. Therefore the plaintiff's behavior is A thing for it., harbor resentment, not the wanton provocation, showing strong bravado, any damage to property of the disturb social order provocative acts, the defendant to stir up trouble for the implementation of reeducation through labor has no basis in fact, illegal erroneous application of the law, procedures, and the defendant is in to stir up trouble crime report capture. Under the condition of rehabilitation through labour, and the plaintiff, belongs to the abuse of power. Therefore requested the court to revoke the defendant made (2009) Shanghai Lao Wei Shen Zi No. 4862nd decision of reeducation through labor.

The court identified: Juchao District Miao XX plaintiff in Miao Jie Dao Sheng Li Cun Wei Hui people, the original work in Shanghai Sheng Yu company. The afternoon of August 22, 2009, the plaintiff Li Ming colleagues and employees of Shanghai Pacifi Corp because of competition for customer disputes beaten. Shanghai City Public Security Bureau Putuo branch Changzheng police station (referred to as the Changzheng police station) alarm processing, to Li Ming issued the inspection notice, Li Ming without injury. That night, Shanghai Sheng Yu company responsible person Shen Haiyi mustered the employees of the company to the Pacifi Corp of Shanghai Jinsha shop retaliation, the plaintiff also to know. Shen Haiyi et al to the Pacifi Corp of Shanghai Jinsha shop after shop door closed, Shen Haiyi and the command staff will sands shop glass door and store office equipment damage, the plaintiff into the store after the hand over an air conditioner, the damage of property and identified the value of 13460 yuan (without air conditioning loss list). On the same day, Changzheng police station receives masses to report, 25 days of investigation, the Shanghai Municipal Public Security Bureau Putuo branch for suspected stir up trouble crime criminal detention of the plaintiff, 29 day extension of the period of detention to September 25th. In September 15th, the branch to the Putuo District Procuratorate approved the arrest of the plaintiff, on 25 August, the Putuo District Procuratorate made not to approve the decision of arrest, on the same day, the defendant made (2009) Shanghai Lao Wei Shen Zi No. 4862nd the decision of reeducation through labor, decide on the plaintiff in a provocative acts asylum reeducation through labor three months a year on the same day, the defendant make labor; rearing the notice of execution, but did not reach the plaintiff and his family.

The trial court that: the administrative punishment shall adhere to the principle of combining punishment with education. The contralateral XX consistently performs well, no crime or punishment in public security criminal record, which is involved in the destruction of property behavior in directs the company under the leadership of the organizers, neither, nor the commander, intention without trouble, and the plot remarkable slight; the plaintiff in the detention period, the public security organ plans to carry out two punishment, belong to breach of privilege; the defendant made (2009) Shanghai Lao Wei Shen Zi No. 4862nd the decision of reeducation through labor in custody on whether the plaintiff allowance has no explanations, also not explicitly inform the plaintiff related rights and obligations, breach of the "reeducation through labor implementation means" the thirteenth stipulation, also do not accord with "the public security organ shall handle the case of reeducation through labor provisions" form of the elements of the forty-ninth section second about making the decision of reeducation through labor of reeducation through labor; "Trial Measures" provisions of article twelfth labor educated person should sign on the notice of reeducation through labor, and there is no evidence that the defendant to the plaintiff, the notice of reeducation through labor. To sum up, the defendant made the decision of reeducation through labor unclear in fact finding, illegal procedure, shall be revoked in accordance with the. The case by the court's Judicial Committee for discussion and decision, according to the "PRC Administrative Litigation Law" article eighteenth, article fifty-fourth (two) second, 3, "the people's Republic of China on Administrative Punishment Law" article third, article ninth of the second paragraph, then decision: to revoke the defendant Shanghai City Management Committee of reeducation through labor in September 25, 2009 to make (2009) Shanghai Lao Wei Shen Zi No. 4862nd decision of reeducation through labor of the Miao XX receiving reeducation through labor three months a year in the decision of the book. The 50 yuan of case acceptance fee, by the Shanghai Municipal Labor Education Management Committee burden.

Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee against Chaohu City Juchao District People's court the appeal that cause: 1, miu XX with the case without any relationship to, the one-sided, without verifying the real situation, actively participate in the destruction of Shanghai Pacifi Corp property, it has the obvious endless trouble, try to show to oppress the weak, trouble in the subjective intent; 2, this is a case of illegal acts together people, so participants shall assume joint responsibility for the loss caused by the consequences of 13460 yuan, the court will Mou XX behavior from the common violations in stripping out the law provisions; 3, the public security organ is first in criminal investigation, in the clear Mou XX behavior does not constitute a crime, make the decision of reeducation through labor according to the nature of its behavior, not in violation of the law, there is no "a two penalty"; 4, the decision of reeducation through labor has included the "most" of reeducation through labor cases prescribed in article forty-ninth the public security organs, a decision before custody allowance situation, this will manifest through the "notice" of reeducation through labor form, it Decision of reeducation through labor book has the same legal effect, does not affect the substantive rights and Miao XX; administrative trial is based on laws and regulations as the basis, according to the regulations, the public security organ and the "provisions" case of reeducation through labor is a normative document, not the court administrative case basis, the court that the the procedure illegal evidence; 5, "reeducation through labor" Trial Measures for the twelfth legislative original meaning is to protect the people's right to know is the reeducation through labor. This will make the decision on the contralateral XX receiving reeducation through labor to service the decision of reeducation through labor, miu XX also decided in the reeducation through labor service receipt signed book, although this will not take notice of reeducation through labor form let XX Sign MoU decision, but this would have substantial performance of the "reeducation through labor trial the provisions of article twelfth measures" content, and earnestly safeguard the right to know; 6, the reeducation through labor is to be implemented the compulsory education and reform through labor, which belongs to the administrative compulsory measures, rather than administrative punishment, the court will reeducation through labor as administrative punishment, is obviously wrong. To sum up, this will make on the contralateral XX reeducation through labor decided that clear facts, irrefutable evidence, accurate, applicable law is correct, in accordance with the procedures and authority of legal, please the trial court upheld the decision of reeducation through labor.

Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee in the provide the following evidence, based on: (a) the fact evidence: 1, the public security organs to ask XX Shen Haiyi, Zhou Jianguo, Miao, Wang Dashun, Chu Xiaohua, Xiang Shengyu, Zhang Jian, Li Xiaoli, the 2 record; Wang Qin, Liu Qian, Li Shan, Zhu Pingli, Zhu Weili, Luo Jing, Qiu Kefeng, Xu Min testimony; 4, photographs of the scene; 5, damaged property valuation expert attorney, conclusion and notice; 6, captured after, working conditions, and the list of property; 7, Miao et al. XX census data. The above evidence to prove the existence of an XX affray facts. (two) procedure evidence: 1, (2009) Pu Gong Lao Zi No. 325 "on the contralateral XX, Chu Xiaohua, Wang Dashun, Sheng Yu is receiving reeducation through labor the papers a year for"; 2, (2009) Shanghai Labor Affairs Shen Zi No. 4862nd "the decision of reeducation through labor"; 3, a delivery receipt and mail list. The above evidence to prove that the contralateral XX asylum reeducation through labor program is legitimate. (three) the legal basis for the trial measures: "reeducation through labor" tenth (four), "the State Council on the question of re education through labour" third, "the State Council on the supplementary provisions of reeducation through labor" second.

The above evidence have transferred together with the case in our hospital. After review, the court ruled that the evidence in accordance with the law, and the parties to the case facts without objection, the court for confirmation.

This house believes that: Miao XX colleagues Li Ming and as a result of the Shanghai Pacifi Corp employees for customer was beaten after injury, manager Shen Haiyi led the contralateral XX unit colleagues found the Shanghai Pacifi Corp sands shop, because of not seeing the company, for the furore, miu XX et al in Shen under the command of the brick of the shop glass door computer display screen, and damage to property, has certain influence to the social order, is a violation of public security serious behavior. But Samuel XX behavior is intentional behavior A thing for it., harbor resentment, provocative acts and make trouble out of nothing, wanton provocation, creating a disturbance, run amuck, any damage to property, the destruction of public order is different. The Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee to disturb the behavior on the implementation of XX system of reeducation through labor law was not applicable to qualitative, error. The original judgment shall be revoked, the correct results, shall be maintained. The reeducation through labor is a kind of mandatory measures were bred person compulsory education and reform of restriction of freedom of person, is a kind of administrative enforcement, rather than administrative punishment, the court applied the "administrative punishment law," the people's Republic of China to review the case, apply the law correctly, should be correct, the grounds of appeal of Shanghai Labor Education Management Committee was established, it was accepted by the court. In accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" sixty-first (a) of the regulations, the decision as follows:

Dismiss the appeal, upheld the.

The second case acceptance fee of $50, by the Shanghai Municipal Labor Education Management Committee burden.

This judgment is the final judgment.

Chief justice Zhang Shangping

Judge Ying Daorong

Acting judge Jiang Chun

Two 0 0 years in June 7th

The clerk Li Wei

 

Yellow XX v. Shanghai Municipal Management Committee of reeducation through labor administrative enforcement and administrative compensation case

-- Anhui province Chaohu City Intermediate People's Court (2010-5-26)

Anhui province Chaohu City Intermediate People's court

Administrative judgment

(2010) the nest to end the word no. seventeenth

The appellant (defendant in the original instance): Shanghai City reeducation through labor management committee, Shanghai No. 185 Fuzhou Road, domicile, organization code: 00327180-X.

Legal representative: Wu barracks, chairman of the committee.

Appellee (the plaintiff): Yellow XX, male. (omitted)

Attorney: summer XX. (omitted)

The third: XX, male. (omitted)

Yellow XX v. Shanghai Municipal Management Committee of reeducation through labor administrative enforcement and administrative compensation case, the people's Court of Lujiang County in Anhui province in February 12, 2010 (2010) - made initial word fourth administrative decision. The Shanghai Municipal Labor Education Management Committee, to appeal to the court. This court formed a collegiate bench, the case was heard. Now the trial has been closed.

Yellow XX claimed: Disputes incidents by Ai Yuchun provoked Ai Yuchun, should bear the primary responsibility, plaintiff in beating the behavior of others does not constitute a stir up trouble. The defendant to the plaintiff made the decision of reeducation through labor that facts are wrong, illegal erroneous application of the law, procedures, request the court to revoke the defendant in accordance with the law, and compensation for economic loss of 11534.97 yuan.

The trial court found: October 21, 2009 20 am,Ai JiahaiIn Shanghai City, Zhongjiang Road No. 368 site dormitory first floor andAi Kefa, Ai Keman, Ai Yongbing, Xu Chengbing, XX and his wife, Fang MeiDuring the dinner, Ai Jiahai out, hands are two floor hanging laundry water to the head. Therefore, the site security guard Ai Yuchun Ai Jiahai and was hanging laundry quarrel, in the course of argumentParty XXAt the two floor beer bottle hit the staircase guardrail blasting, the site security of Wanglong facial scratch broken glass. After accounting for Wang told Ai Yuchun to call the police and notify the site security captain Wang Wanqiang arrived at the scene processing. Wang Wanqiang answered the phone and informed site security Zhao Jiangang, Mao Qiankun, Ye Xusheng et al to the scene to help processing, Wang Wanqiang waited until after the field,Ai YuchunIn the knowledge that is notAi JiahaiBy using beer bottles of situation Wang face, deliberately to identify systemAi JiahaiThe first forward to beatAi JiahaiYe Xusheng, Mao Qiankun, Wang, for then the beating. AI Jia Hai's wifeFang MeiLooked at that call site workersXu ShunAnd informAi JiahaiBeing beaten, called Xu Shun, quickly back to the site. Xu Shunsui inform workersYao Yunfeng, Meng Jianyu, Xu Xiaoxiang, Jiang Hui, Xia Jiangying and the plaintiffBack to barracks, at the site entrance Xu Shun seven people each pick up a stick,Ai Jiahai see Xu ShunOther articles stick to that directs them andXu Chengbing, XXBeating each other, and to Ai Yuchun, Zhao Jiangang, Mao Qiankun, slight injury,Xia JiangyingThe assault was also slightly injured Mao Qiankun et al. For Wang dragon Zuoquan is beer bottles broken glass laceration, the forensic identification also constitutes a slight injury. By participating in the disputeFang MeiBy the Shanghai Municipal Public Security Bureau Putuo branch to stir up trouble in administrative detention for 15 days, Zhao Jiangang, Wang, Xu students accounted for leaf,Xu Xiaoxiang, Jiang Hui,Mao Qiankun,Meng JianyuBy the Shanghai Municipal Public Security Bureau Putuo branch to gang fighting administrative detention for 15 days or 10 days,Ai Jiahai, Ai Yuchun,Xu Shun, Yao Yunfeng,Xia Jiangying, Xu Chengbing, XXAndPlaintiffWere the accused be reeducation through labor. The trial the plaintiff added supplementary administrative compensation litigation request, requests the defendant by the average wage of 2008 year the town unit on-the-job worker 111.99 yuan compensation for the economic loss of 11534.97 yuan.

The trial court held that: the plaintiffYellow XXThe bossAi JiahaiOn the construction site by site security dormitory after the assault, should inquire condition, stop the development of the situation, through the relevant departments to handle properly. However, the plaintiff after hearing the news that rushed to the scene, and inAi JiahaiBy participating in the assaultSite securityMany people, causing slight injury, the behavior is illegal, according to the law should be punished. But the plaintiff's actions are not in public places or other places make trouble out of nothing, booing trouble, make trouble out of nothing, without beating others, deliberately provocative, run amuck, provocative acts disrupting public order, the defendant is "reeducation through labor Trial Measures" article tenth (four) to cause trouble to the reeducation through labor is one year belong to applicable law improper. Increased incidental administrative compensation litigation request the court, in accordance with the law, the direct economic loss should be on the calculation of annual average salary of the staff. Accordingly, in accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article fifty-fourth (two) first, 2, sixty-seventh, sixty-eighth in the first paragraph of the first paragraph of the people's Republic of China and the "State Compensation Law" article third (a), the provisions of article twenty-sixth, the judgment: one, to revoke the defendant Shanghai reeducation through labor management committee made in November 20, 2009 (2009) Shanghai Labor Affairs (Trial) No. 5733rd decision of reeducation through labor; two, the defendant Shanghai City reeducation through Labor Management Committee on the 2008 annual average wage of workers across the country, the standard of 111.99 yuan, the plaintiff's yellow XX was during the reeducation through labor economic loss. Namely, since November 20, 2009 by the day until the actual date of termination of labor education and rehabilitation. Compensation be paid within seven days after the effective date of this decision. The 50 yuan of case acceptance fee, by the Shanghai Municipal Labor Education Management Committee burden.

Shanghai City Management Committee of reeducation through labor Appeal said: the original finds that the facts are clear, the evidence, the trial procedures are legitimate, but think yellow XX behavior does not constitute improper affray. The so-called provocative acts refers to one or more people in a public place or other places make trouble out of nothing, booing trouble, make trouble out of nothing, without beating others, wanton provocation, run amuck, disrupting public order behavior. In this case, the court has identified XX Huang AI I ordered the involvement in the beating of site security, causing many people slight injury, yellow XX also confessed the beating object is not limited to beat Ai Jiahai's security, but to all wearing security uniforms were beaten. Therefore, the assault has been completely regardless of cause and object things, without beating others, consistent with the subjective and objective performance. In addition,Yellow XXConflict with each other after security, not only to implement after playing behavior on the security in the site of the dormitory area, and also armed rushed to the nearby the street, threatened to beat security, therefore, influence of yellow XX trouble cause is not limited to the site, but the site surrounding the destruction of public order, accords with the provocative acts the. In sum, the court held that the Yellow XX behavior does not constitute a stir up trouble the lack of factual and legal basis. (2010) request to withdraw Lu for early word no. fourth administrative judgment, to maintain the Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee (2009) Shanghai Labor Affairs (Trial) No. 5733rd decision of reeducation through labor.

Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee to the trial court for the main evidence are: 1, the public security organ may Chengbing, Yao Yunfeng, Xia Jiangying, Fang Mei, XX, Xu Xiaoxiang, Jiang Hui, Meng Jianyu, Ai Yuchun, Zhao Jiangang, Mao Qiankun, Wang, Wang Wanqiang for interrogation record, Xu Sheng and yellow leaves XX, to Xu Shun, to prove (2009 Shanghai (Trial) Labor Affairs) 5733rd, the decision of reeducation through labor facts; 2, the witness, He Diancang, Yue Xizheng Xu Qiang, Jiang Shuren testimony, that yellow XX, fighting the negative influence to the construction site of the fight at the site of Ai Yuchun, Xia Jiangying, Zhao Jiangang; Meng Jianyu, Mao Qiankun, Wang, for the inspection notice and forensic clinical judicial identification, that many people suffered minor injuries, the fact; 3 (Shanghai) (PU) traveling through public reference No. (2009) No. 1034 and No. 1035 appraisal conclusion notice, injury identification conclusion has been served to the parties; 4, Shanghai City Public Security Bureau Putuo Branch issued Changfeng Village police station report, proof of the and the detection of cases; 5, the Shanghai Municipal Public Security Bureau Putuo branch seized goods, the list of documents in four copies, proof of Meng Jianyu, Xu Shun, Fang Hui Jiang XX, each holding A stick in each other; 6, Mei, Xu Xiaoxiang, Jiang Hui, Mao Qiankun, Zhao Jiangang, Wang, Meng Jianyu of the decision on administrative punishment, Ai Yuchun Ye Xusheng, made a written decision of reeducation through labor, shows that processing of other people in the case; 7, Xia Jiangying, Xu Chengbing, Xu Shun, Yao Yunfeng, Wang Wanqiang, Ai Yuchun, Wang, Mao Qiankun, Zhao Jiangang, Fang Mei, XX, Xu Xiaoxiang, Ye Xusheng, Jiang Hui and yellow XX resident population basic information table, prove the basic information of yellow XX et al. The above evidence are transferred to our hospital with the volume.

Yellow XX without a written reply.

The written examination, the judgment of the first instance on the evidence of the certification in accordance with the law, finds that the facts are clear, the parties have no objection, the court for confirmation.

This house believes that: Defiance and affray refers to make trouble out of nothing, in public places, creating a disturbance, beating hurt innocent, random provocation, run amuck, destruction of property, the destruction of public order act. In this case,Ai JiahaiDisputes trivial and Ai Yuchun were more beatings, afterAi JiahaiTo beat the Yellow XX, sparking a melee in melee, both parties in varying degrees of slight injury. Yellow XX behavior objectively to public order produce certain negative effects, but there is no subjective arbitrarily make trouble out of nothing, intentionally assault innocent people, and which does not comply with the provocative acts, Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee to stir up trouble on the Yellow XX implementation system of reeducation through labor qualitative uncertainty, erroneous application of the law. In this case, the dispute with the Yellow XX et al are the site security, both sides in the many melee situations, yellow XX admitted that although the beating object not limited to beat Ai Jiahai's security, but relatively speaking, the infringed object is identified, namely the site security. The Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee of the grounds of appeal can not be established, the court shall not be accepted. From Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee on the implementation of yellow XX Administrative Enforcement Act illegal, compensation shall be made according to law. The original facts are clear, the evidence is sufficient, the legal procedure. Accordingly, in accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" sixty-first (a) the provisions of item, the decision as follows:

Dismiss the appeal, upheld the.

The second case acceptance fee of $50, by the Shanghai Municipal Labor Education Management Committee burden.

This judgment is the final judgment.

Chief justice Zhang Shangping

Judge Ying Daorong

Acting judge Jiang Chunhui

Two O O in May 26th

The book clerk Xia Yang (generation)

Wang Mingdong v. Shanghai Municipal Management Committee of reeducation through labor administrative reeducation through labor decision

-- higher people's Court of Anhui province (2010-1-29)

The Anhui Provincial Higher People's court

Administrative judgment

[2010] in line with the word no. nineteenth

The appellant (plaintiff in the trial of first instance): Wang Mingdong, male, born in February 8, 1991, Manchu, primary school culture, 10 group of Jilin province Jiutai Tu Men Zhen Shan Zui Cun, domicile, now Anhui Nanhu reeducation through labor management asylum reeducation through labor.

Appellee (defendant in the trial of first instance): Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee, Shanghai No. 185 Fuzhou Road domicile.

Legal representative: Wu barracks, director.

Attorney: Wang Xunli, member of the Public Security Bureau of Shanghai city.

Wang Mingdong v. Shanghai City reeducation through labor administrative reeducation through labor management committee decided a case, the Xuancheng intermediate people's court in 2009 July 13 to (2009) announced in early word no. twenty-sixth administrative decision, appeal to the court. This court formed a collegiate bench, the case was heard. Now the end of the trial.

The court of first instance according to the effective evidence collection, identification of the following facts: Wang Mingdong in 2008 February to Shanghai city to work, stay in Shanghai Fengxian District Nanqiao Zhen Zhang Weng Miao cun. In February 11, 2009, Wu Zhiguang and Zeng Li, Shen Wenfu gambling dispute. After theWu Zhiguang, He Guangfang and Wu Zhiming, Zou Suhua, Zou JunshengZeng Li, Shen Wenfu and others to discuss beaten, and by theWu Zhiguang, He GuangfangTo stay near each other for check. At the same time, Zeng Li, Shen Wenfu and Xiang Songtao, Wang Mingdong and others to beatWu Zhiguang, and notify the Li Sanliang will arrive on the spot, to provide for the fight. Two pines. The next morning, the two parties in Shanghai City Jin Xuan Lu Fengxian District Nan Qiao Zhen corner to the fights, police seized on the spot. During the period, Li Sanliang, Wang Mingdong at the scene are holding iron bars, to fight in the kitchen knife. In March 6th the same year, Shanghai City Public Security Bureau Fengxian branch to Shanghai City reeducation through labor management committee report on the Wang Mingdong reeducation through labor. In March 12, 2009, Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee "reeducation through labor according to the Trial Measures" article tenth (four) regulations, thirteenth, (2009) make Shanghai Labor Affairs Shen Zi No. 850th the decision of reeducation through labor, decided to act of affray Wang Mingdong received reeducation through labor for one year and three months, and in in March 13th sent to Wang Mingdong. Wang Mingdong refuses to accept the decision of reeducation through labor, and bring an administrative lawsuit to the people's court.

Trial court that: according to the "Supplementary Provisions" of the State Council on education through labor provisions of article second, Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee has made the decision of reeducation through labor of their statutory functions and powers. Wang Mingdong residence is in the countryside, but was living in Shanghai city has a year, by holding body reeducation through labor conditions. Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee Wang Mingdong to make the decision of reeducation through labor, found Wang Mingdong guilty of acts of affray facts are clear, evidence really, sufficient, accurate. Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee according to the "State Council on the question of re education through labour" third, "reeducation through labor Trial Measures" article tenth (four) regulations, thirteenth, decided to Wang Mingdong asylum reeducation through labor, correctly applies the law, legal procedures. In accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article fifty-eighth (a) of the Convention, the decision upheld Shanghai reeducation through labor management committees (2009 ) Shanghai Lao Wei Shen Zi No. 850th decision of reeducation through labor to Wang next winter asylum reeducation through labor three months a year in the decision of the book.

The main appellant Wang Mingdong: Shanghai City reeducation through labor management committee in the decision process of reeducation through labor, fails to perform the corresponding program according to "public security organs handling cases of reeducation through labor provisions", the decision procedure of serious violation of law, a trial does not grant to examine. A judgment maintains the reeducation through labor decision error, request the court to ascertain the facts, the judgment shall be amended according to.

The trial the defendant Shanghai City reeducation through labor management committee to the court of first instance of the evidence cited are: 1, He Guangfang, Wu Chi, Wu Zhiming, Zou Suhua, Zou Junsheng and five notes, to prove that the people and had a number of squares in Fengxian District Nanqiao Zhen Jin Xuan Lu Shanghai City partial place to fight, to be police seized; 2, Zeng Li, Shen Wenfu notes, to prove once, Shen and Wu Zhiguang gambling dispute, after the two with Wang Mingdong, Xiang Songtao and others to discuss the beating of Wu Zhihua, and notify the Li Sanliang involved in the fight. Xiang Songtao offers two for fighting. The next day morning, had a party and Wu Zhiguang a group of people to fight in Shanghai City Jin Xuan Lu Fengxian District Nanqiao town remote place, police seized; 3, Xiang Songtao notes, to demonstrate and Zeng Li et al. Discuss the beating of Wu Zhiguang, and provide the iron two root for the fight, fight in the seized; Wang Mingdong identified the chopper to participation fights; 4, Wang Mingdong's record, prove and Zeng Li et al. The beating of Wu Zhiguang, after the chopper to fight in seized; 5, Li Sanliang notes, that is Zeng Li mustered to Jin Xuan Lu, is prepared to fight in the. 6, the Shen Shuyong record, prove and Zeng Li, Shen Wenfu, Xiang beat Wu Zhiguang to discuss, the process involved in the fight; 7, seized goods, the list of documents, to prove that the parties have weapons; 8, work, and that the arrested after; 9, photograph of a group, to prove the two sides held the weapon; 10, the household registration information, proof of identity of Wang Mingdong; 11, the Shanghai Municipal Public Security Bureau Fengxian branch on request of Wang Mingdong et al asylum reeducation through labor, that Wang Mingdong was at the request of reeducation through labor program; 12, the decision of reeducation through labor the receipt of service and the postal certificate, certificate of service of process decision of reeducation through labor.

The evidence had been transferred along with the case in our hospital. After review, evidence of reeducation through labor in Shanghai reeducation through labor management committee decisions can prove Wang Mingdong the chopper to fight in the fact, this court legally recognised. The program provides evidence about the Shanghai City Labor Reeducation Through Labor Management Committee decision, cannot fully prove that according to the "Regulations of the public security organ shall handle the case of reeducation through labor", to fulfill the corresponding level approval stamp program, this court legally recognized procedure evidence provides Shanghai city labor reeducation through labor management committee decision problems.

This house believes that: the State Council forwarded the Ministry of public security "reeducation through labor Trial Measures" article tenth (four) provision, for affray, disrupting social order, not enough for criminal punishment be asylum reeducation through labor. "Public Security Management Punishment Law" of the people's Republic of China article twenty-sixth (a) regulations, a gang fighting behavior, following more than five days to ten days detention, and may concurrently impose a fine of five hundred yuan; if the circumstances are relatively serious, department for more than ten days to fifteen days detention, can impose a fine of one thousand yuan. The thirty-second article of the law, to control illegal guns, ammunition or appliance crossbow, dagger and the regulations of the state in the public places, following more than five days to ten days detention, can impose a fine of five hundred yuan of the following. In this case, Wang Mingdong is not a gambling dispute deacon end when the thing person, nor affray organizers, the others to carry the knife, to fight in the behavior, not causing property, personal damage, the behavior is in violation of public security management, but has not yet reached the asylum reeducation through labor degree. The Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee decided to Wang Mingdong to be receiving reeducation through labor three months a year, the lack of factual and legal basis, and make a decision of reeducation through labor program have irregularities. A judgment maintains Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee (2009 ) Shanghai Lao Wei Shen Zi No. 850th decision of reeducation through labor of Wang Mingdong holding a year of reeducation through labor for three months because of improper, also a trial for "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article fifty-eighth (a) make error in judgment applicable the law, should be corrected according to law. The main appellant Wang Mingdong was established, the school shall support. In accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article sixty-first (two), fifty-fourth (two) of Article 1, 3 paragraph, the decision as follows:

One, the revocation of Xuancheng City Intermediate People's Court (2009) announced in early word no. twenty-sixth administrative judgment;

Two, the revocation of Shanghai City reeducation through labor management committees (2009 ) to Wang Mingdong asylum reeducation through labor three months a year in the decision of reeducation through labor decision No. 850th Shanghai Labor Affairs.

Three, the second instance procedure of the 50 yuan fee, by the Shanghai Municipal Labor Education Management Committee burden.

This judgment is the final judgment.

　　

Chief justice Zhou Hui

Acting judge Deng Xiaoyue

Acting judge stone

　　

Two 0 0 years in January 29th

　　

The clerk Chen Mo

Shandong province Jining City reeducation through labor management committee v. Lu Jiaoni refuses to accept the decision of reeducation through labor

-- the Shaoyang City Intermediate People's Court of Hunan province (2009-3-27)

 

Shaoyang City Intermediate People's court

Administrative ruling

(2009) Shao Zhonghang end No. twenty-first

The appellant (defendant in the original instance) of Shandong province Jining City reeducation through labor management committee, place of residence: Shandong city in Jining Province Guang River Road No. 261.

The legal representative of the Han Army, director.

Agent Hu Kebo, Jining City Public Security Bureau police law office.

Appellee (the plaintiff) Lu Jiaoni, female, was born in August 6, 1973, Han nationality, primary school culture, live (omitted), clothing to teach in Shandong province the first women's reeducation through labor management (Ji'nan city).

Attorney: Ceng Liangsheng, lawyer of Hunan Ze yu.

The appellant Shandong province Jining City reeducation through labor management committee because Lu Jiaoni refuses to accept the decision of reeducation through labor case, the Shaodong County in Hunan province people's Court (2009) Shao Donghang at the beginning of the word no. seventh administrative decision, appeal to the court.

In the second instance trial process, the parties reached a settlement agreement, the appellant agreed to terminate the decision on the respondent made of reeducation through labor, the appellee volunteer service to teach during the request for compensation, appeal people think there is no need to go on litigation, voluntary withdrawal of appeal.

This house believes that, in this case the appellant in the litigation process, take the initiative to change the specific administrative act, the termination of the implementation of the decision of reeducation through labor, the respondent reached the purpose of litigation, the settlement agreement reached by both sides, is the true meaning of the parties, and not contrary to the law, the court recognized. The appellant sees no reason to continue litigation and withdrawal of appeal, in accordance with the law, it shall be permitted, the detention decision and the original judgment shall not perform. To sum up, according to the "Regulations" provisions of the Supreme People's Court on some issues of administrative litigation case second, eighth, ruling as follows:

Leave to appeal people in Shandong province Jining City Labor Education Management Committee to withdraw his appeal.

The second instance procedure fee 50 yuan, by charging 25 yuan, shall be borne by the appellant Shandong province Jining City Labor Education Management committee.

 

Chief justice Xiao Zhumei

Judge He Fang

Judge Wu Yuehui

 

Two hundred nine years in March 27th

 

The clerk Li Man

 

Attached: relevant legal provisions

"Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on some issues of administrative litigation case"

Article second the defendant to change specific administrative act, the plaintiff applies for withdrawal of the case, in accordance with the following conditions, the people's court shall rule to permit:

(a) applies for withdrawal of the case is the true meaning of the parties;

(two) the defendant to change specific administrative act, not in violation of laws, regulations and prohibitions, not to exceed or give up power, does not damage the public interests and the legitimate rights and interests of others;

(three) the defendant has changed or decide to change the specific administrative acts being sued, and inform the people's court in writing;

During the eighth second or retrial administrative organs to change specific administrative acts being sued, the parties to apply for the withdrawal of appeal or retrial, with reference to the provisions of.

The main content to allow withdrawal appeal or retrial ruling shall be the administrative organ to change the sued specific administrative behavior and performance, and can according to the specific situation of the case, the specific administrative acts being sued in court in the original judgment or reason in whole or in part, no longer execution.

 

The people's Government of Chongqing City, the East China Sea Peng v. reeducation through labor management committee

-- the Chongqing first intermediate people's Court (2008-11-18)

 

The Chongqing first intermediate people's court

Administrative judgment

(2008) a French bank Chongqing early word no. 248th

The East China Sea Peng (Ceng Yongming Wang Peng, Cao Yang) was born in October 17, 1991, male, Han nationality, residence: (omitted), now living (omitted).

Legal representative Cao Yan (East China Sea Peng's mother), was born in March 6, 1970, Han nationality, now living (omitted).

Attorney: Chen Ruiwei, lawyer of Chongqing millennium.

Attorney: Luo Ruizhi, lawyer of Chongqing millennium.

The people's Government of Chongqing City, the labor education management committee.

The legal representative of ice, the Committee director.

Agent Tan Yangbin, Fengjie County Public Security Bureau cadres.

The people's Government of Chongqing City, the East China Sea. The plaintiff sued the defendants of reeducation through labor reeducation through labor management committee decides a case, the hospital in August 21, 2008 after accepting the case, the case on October 16, 2008 held a public hearing of the case. Attorney Tan Yangbin reeducation through labor management committee to the East China Sea friend and agent Chen Ruiwei, the Chongqing Municipal People's government to participate in the proceedings. Now the trial has been closed.

The specific administrative act is: in August 6, 2008, the Chongqing Municipal People's Government Management Committee of reeducation through labor East Sea Peng and others Gang kidnapping behavior is made through the trial, Chongqing word (2008) No. 2572nd "the decision of reeducation through labor", decided to Donghai Tomo labor education three months a year.

The defendant to provide the following evidence within the time limit for adducing evidence legal court, and be as shown, cross examination at trial:

(a) the authority basis

The Ministry of public security of the Trial Measures "reeducation through labor" the first paragraph of article fourth "the province, autonomous region, municipality directly under the central government and large and medium-sized city people's Government of reeducation through labor management committee, leadership and management of reeducation through labor, the examination and approval accepts the personnel of reeducation through labor" that Chongqing government reeducation through labor management committee has the authority to make the decision of reeducation through labor.

(two) evidence

1, Fengjie County Public Security Bureau respectively in July 25, 2008, July 30th, August 3rd three of Donghai Tomo's interrogation record;

2, Fengjie County Public Security Bureau in July 24, 2008 August 3rd, Jin Zhiqiang interrogation record;

3, Fengjie County Public Security Bureau in July 29, 2008 to partner Li Cihang interrogation record;

4, Fengjie County Public Security Bureau in July 24, 2008 record of inquiry to the victim Xie Mohua;

The above 1-4 evidence for Xie Mohua owes East friends more than 100 yuan, Donghai Tomo and Jin Zhiqiang, Li CI hang a willXie MohuaForced from the home to the Yongan Fengjie County town of Kuizhou road Anlene hotel room 666, Xie Mohua was beaten and took the knife to threat, and asked Xie Mohua toAt 12 o'clock in the evening beforeHand over two thousand pieces of money for daily expenses in.

5, Fengjie County Public Security Bureau in July 25, 2008 asked for the witness Yang Xiao; that Yang Xiao will Xie Mohua's Construction Bank savings card to withdraw money from the East China Sea friends but not to the fact.

6, Fengjie County Public Security Bureau in July 30, 2008 asked for the witness Liu Qiyan; that Li Cihang and two young people will be the other young people detained in the town of Yongan Fengjie County, the work of Kuizhou road Anlene Hotel 666 rooms, they closed the door, I do not know what to do on the inside.

7, Fengjie County Public Security Bureau in August 1, 2008 asking for the community in Fengjie County, twelve team leader Yin Biwen Donghai Tomo, grandma grandpa; that in the community, the community has no ability to discipline. The East China Sea.

8, Fengjie County Public Security Bureau in July 24, 2008 for the first station to the informant Zhu Dongguo police interrogation record and Fengjie County Bureau of Yongan town issued captured after; that two young people turn things in his cousin home, stopped, knife forced away, came to the police station to catch. The verification of the public security organs, one is the East China Sea, a friend called Jin Zhiqiang.

9, Fengjie County Public Security Bureau seized items, the list of documents and photos to prove some; crime location and related items.

10, Fengjie County Public Security Bureau in 2006 October, Su Lei, Liu Meng, Donghai Tomo interrogation transcripts and Fengjie County People's Procuratorate of Chongqing [2007]1, "the decision not to prosecute"; that Donghai Tomo is not a first offender, Donghai Tomo has worked with Su Lei, Liu Meng together with the implementation of theft facts.

(three) procedure evidence

11, Fengjie County Public Security Bureau of Yongan town police station criminal cases first received registration form, Fengjie County Public Security Bureau filing decision, a number of reports of reeducation through labor;

12, the people's Government of Chongqing City Management Committee of reeducation through labor in 2008 3 August, the East China Sea Peng served hearing notification, the public security organ the rights and obligations of this book;

13, the people's Government of Chongqing city in August 7, 2008 the reeducation through labor management committee to the East China Sea friends and family served Yu detention Shen Zi (2008) No. 2572nd "the decision of reeducation through labor".

The above 11-13 evidence to prove that the defendant made the decision of reeducation through labor legal procedures.

(four) the legal basis

The Ministry of public security of reeducation through labor "Trial Measures" article tenth (two) of the following persons receiving reeducation through labor "gang murder, robbery, rape, arson and other criminal gangs, not enough for criminal punishment";

The plaintiff claims, 1, the act does not constitute a crime behavior, should not apply for "reeducation through labor" Provisions Article tenth second; he is a minor, and is in the school student, the defendant to determine the reeducation through labor in violation of the "law on the protection of minors", the Ministry of public security, public security organs for reeducation through labor "cases of provisions" and other laws and regulations. The defendant to the plaintiff had no legal basis for decision of reeducation through labor. The specific administrative act 2, the case handling organ, in violation of the statutory procedures, asking minor plaintiff, the plaintiff did not notify the parents or other guardians present, nor to the plaintiff and the guardian served "hearings this book" organize hearings. The plaintiff made "the decision of reeducation through labor", not to the guardian announced the decision of reeducation through labor, on the basis of facts, period, the decision is not delivered the guardian. 3, the defendant made the decision of reeducation through labor "the book" in the place of domicile and current address is wrong, that the plaintiff is unemployed is wrong. To sum up, the defendant made the decision of reeducation through labor in violation of legal procedures, in violation of the provisions of laws and regulations on special protection of minors, Yu requested the court to revoke the defendant camp made Shen Zi (2008) No. 2572nd "the decision of reeducation through labor".

The plaintiff before the court submitted to the court for the evidence and:

1, Cao Yan's id photocopy, Tianjin city Wuqing District Dou Zhang Zhuang Xiang Jia Zhuang village committee to prove, the resident population registration card; that Cao Yan was the friend's mother, two people's account in Wuqing District, Tianjin city, Dou Zhang Zhuang village to village.

2, Donghai Tomo's student ID, photocopy of proof test scores; Donghai Tomo is the identity of the students.

The defendant said, July 24, 2008, Donghai Tomo together with others to Xie Mohua beaten and threatened at knife, asked Xie Mohua to deliver 2000 yuan. Donghai Tomo Gang kidnap behavior, I appointed to make the decision of reeducation through labor is not inappropriate, request the court to maintain my commission decision of reeducation through labor.

The trial process, the plaintiff has no objection to the defendant for the authority basis. The defendant shows evidence for 1 objection, think Donghai Tomo interrogation record is a policeman made, without notifying the parents or guardians to interrogation, and record the signature is being threatened by the sign. No objection to the evidence in 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 items of evidence. Has any objection to the evidence of 7 proof, just proves that the East China Sea friend guardian, and regulatory capacity. On the evidence of 10 has the objection, that the evidence and the case of no relevance, can not prove that the East China Sea is illegal and criminal record. The defendant to the plaintiff evidence showing the bootstrap program 11, 13 no objection, on the evidence of 12 has the objection, that the hearing procedures illegal. The plaintiff objected to the defendant for the legal basis in the East China Sea, that friends of the act does not constitute a kidnapping, not of reeducation through labor "Trial Measures" article tenth (two) provision may be reeducation through labor situation. The defendant to the plaintiff for the authenticity of the evidence no objection, but that influence students' identity is not the reeducation through labor.

The Institute of the original, the defendant for the evidence to confirm the following:

The heave shown authority basis and factual evidence in evidence 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 of the evidence, because the plaintiff for the authenticity, legitimacy, relevance without objection, to prove the facts of the case, the court will be admissible. On the evidence of 1, because of the East China Sea friends did not give evidence to the contrary on the interrogation of the notes made by a police making, there is no evidence that the signature on the transcript is forced to. The record in the East China Sea Peng statements and friend Jin Zhiqiang, Li Chi Hong confession, so three times the interrogation of Donghai Tomo shall be adopted. On the evidence of 7, record of investigation in the East China Sea Peng grandpa community leader of the Fengjie County Public Security Bureau, the record collection procedures are legitimate, associated with the different purposes, that shall not affect the validity of the evidence, the evidence shall be admissible in this school 7. On the evidence of 10, because the public security organs in 2006 the collection of Su Lei, Liu Meng, Donghai Tomo interrogation, and the people's Procuratorate of Fengjie city Chongqing County No. [2007]1 "the decision not to prosecute" confirmed that in 2006 August, Donghai Tomo participated in the theft of the facts, the evidence shall be admissible in our hospital. The evidence shows the program for 11, 13, because the plaintiff without objection, the court will be admissible. On the evidence of 12, because the plaintiff did not give the defendant hearing procedure illegal evidence, the defendant for the hearing procedure is the case after the audit, in the submission of reeducation through labor approval committee approval decision told the East Peng, the evidence shall be admissible in our hospital. On the legal basis for the defendant, because "reeducation through labor" Trial Measures are formulated by the Ministry of public security, normative documents specifically regulate measures of re education through labor, the case can refer to. Reeducation through labor Trial Measures "article tenth" is applicable to Donghai Tomo (two) the provisions of item, should combine the case to be determined. On the plaintiff to heave shown evidence, the defendant has no objection to the authenticity, and to prove the relationship between Cao Yan and Donghai Tomo and Donghai Tomo identity, this court legally be adopted.

According to the available evidence and the two parties interrogation opinion, the cognizance of the fact:

July 24, 2008 afternoon, the East China Sea friends with Li Cihang, Jin Zhiqiang, Xie Mohua owes its more than 100 yuan on the grounds, will Xie Mohua forced from the home to the Yongan Fengjie County town of Kuizhou road Anlene hotel room 666, Xie Mohua was beaten and took the knife to threat, and Xie die hand over two thousand dollars in China before 12 p.m.. Xie Mohua took out the body of the postal savings card, also called it a construction bank card, Donghai Tomo will take the two card to withdraw money, but the two cards are no deposit. The East China Sea after friends with Jin Zhiqiang Xie Mohua in the home turn things change process, by the Xie Mohua family after the alarm to catch. The people's Government of Chongqing city in August 6, 2008 the reeducation through labor management committee in Chongqing labor Shen Zi (2008) No. 2573rd decision of reeducation through labor, decided to Donghai Tomo reeducation through labor three months a year. Decision of the reeducation through labor friends and family after receipt of the East China Sea, litigation to the hospital, Chongqing detention request for revocation of the word (2008) decision No. 2573rd of reeducation through labor. The East China Sea Peng received reeducation through labor in Chongqing City juvenile reeducation through labor management.

This house believes that, according to the Ministry of public security "reeducation through labor" Trial Measures for the first paragraph of article fourth "provinces, autonomous regions, municipalities directly under the central government and large and medium-sized city people's Government of reeducation through labor management committee, leadership and management of reeducation through labor provisions, the examination and approval of the detained reeducation through labor", the people's Government of Chongqing City, the reeducation through labor management the Committee has made the decision of reeducation through labor according to their statutory functions and powers. The East China Sea. Although Xie Mohua has one hundred multivariate economic disputes, but its and others together, beaten, knife threatening way to restrict Chinese Xie die freedom, forced Xie Mohua out two thousand yuan, to the implementation of the blackmail and impose exactions on purpose for kidnapping. But the East China Sea Peng was born in October 17, 1991, was only sixteen years old is a minor, the Ministry of public security of the "Regulations" for the public security organs in tenth cases of reeducation through labor provisions of the second paragraph of "students first offender, juvenile delinquency in school according to, and their parents or other guardians have practical discipline ability, shall not decide labor parenting, but shall be ordered to their parents or other guardians strict discipline." The above provisions, aimed at minors shall strictly control the reeducation through labor. The people's Government of Chongqing City, the reeducation through labor management committee to Donghai Tomo to make the decision of reeducation through labor, the East China Sea friends should find out whether students, and verify their parents or other guardians have no regulatory capacity, should be to the parents or other guardians, neighborhood, school, neighborhood committee or the police investigation, or do not respond to Donghai Tomo to make reeducation through labor. In addition, the public security organs in the interrogation Donghai Tomo, also did not inform the parents or other guardians arrived at the scene, the public security organ for violation of the "Regulations" reeducation through labor cases fourteenth, seventeenth section second. In conclusion, the people's Government of Chongqing City Labor Education Management Committee Donghai Tomo to make the decision of reeducation through labor facts unclear, insufficient evidence, illegal procedure of reeducation through labor, Chongqing make trial word (2008) 2573rd, the decision of reeducation through labor shall be revoked. Accordingly, in accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" (two) of article fifty-fourth, paragraph, sentence as follows:

The people's Government of Chongqing Municipality Chongqing revocation of labor reeducation through labor management committee in August 6, 2008 made Shen Zi (2008) No. 2573rd decision of reeducation through labor.

The litigation fee 50 yuan, by the people's Government of Chongqing City, the burden of reeducation through labor management committee.

Any party who refuses to accept the decision, the verdict can be delivered within fifteen days, submit the written appeal to the court, and the copy number according to the other party, appealed to the Chongqing Higher People's court.

 

Chief justice Zou Ping

Acting judge Zhou Shengchun

Acting judge Luo Hong

Two hundred eight years in November 18th

The clerk Pu Xianfeng

Xu Jingquan v. Shenyang Municipal Commission of reeducation through labor decision of reeducation through labor

-- Liaoning province Shenyang City Intermediate People's Court (2008-4-15)

 

Liaoning province Shenyang City Intermediate People's court

[2008] Shen to end the word no. 112nd

The appellant (the plaintiff) Xu Jingquan, male, born in December 28, 1967, Han, deputy manager of the original Liaozhong County heating company, (omitted)

Appellee (defendant in the original instance) Shenyang City Labor Education Management Committee, ten weft Road Heping District of Shenyang domicile No. 13.

Legal representative: Xu Wenyou, director of the Department of.

Attorney: Zhao Yang, Wang Yan, the staff of the unit.

The appellant because Xu Jingquan v. Shenyang Municipal Commission of reeducation through labor reeducation through labor decision refuses to accept the case, Shenyang Heping District People's Court (2007) and at the beginning of the word no. 117th administrative decision, appeal to the court. This court formed a collegiate bench, held a public hearing of the case, the appellant Xu Jingquan, the appellant Shenyang City reeducation through labor management committee entrusted agent Zhao Yang, Wang Yan attended the court proceedings. Now the trial has been closed.

The investigation, in March 30, 2007 Shenyang City reeducation through labor management committee to Xu Jingquan inspired, directs others to distribute, post deliberately propaganda, wantonly slander others. Abetting the crime, is inadequate for criminal punishment, make Shen the detention of Xu Jingquan (2007) No. 171 decision of reeducation through labor, Xu Jingquan decided to nurture a year.

On the basis of the thought, "reeducation through labor Trial Measures" the provisions of article eleventh, the defendant has the statutory authority decision of reeducation through labor system. The defendant provided evidence to prove that the plaintiff Xu Jingquan has instructed Wang Yuna, Fang Hongyan leaflets facts. Wang Yuna, Fang Hongyan made the statement in the procedure of reeducation through labor in the defendant can confirm each other, which depend on the details, inducement to get. And Wang Yuna, Fang Hongyan and the plaintiff cannot prove to the court for the evidence of illegal evidence. Wang Yuna, Fang Hongyan. The reason is not sufficient, and shall not be adopted. The defendant decided that Xu Jingquan illegal facts "reeducation through labor Trial Measures" article tenth (six) fact rule. So the defendant made the decision of reeducation through labor facts are clear, the evidence is sufficient, correctly applies the law, legal procedures. The plaintiff claims there is no factual evidence and legal basis, no support. In accordance with the "Supreme People's Court on the implementation of 'of the people's Republic of China Administrative Procedure Law' interpretation of several issues" fifty-sixth (four) the provisions of item, rejected the plaintiff Xu Jingquan's claim. The 50 yuan of case acceptance fee by the plaintiff's burden.

The appellant Xu Jingquan appeal, the judgment of the first instance found facts unclear, insufficient evidence. Wang Yuna, Fang Hongyan in the witness proved leaflet behavior unrelated, witnesses in the appellee's record is made in the restriction of personal freedom of the circumstances, should take the witness in the court shall prevail, the appellant did not abetting the crime behavior. Requests the Institute to ascertain the facts, to revoke the decision of reeducation through labor, revocation of the original judgment.

The appellant Shenyang City reeducation through labor management committee to submit a written reply to the hospital, which is argued, reeducation through labor management institutions established in accordance with the law, with the reeducation through labor right of approval, make the decision of reeducation through labor that the appellant abetting the crime facts are clear, evidence really fully, and strictly perform the informing, hearing, approval, service procedures, the legal procedure, and the applicable law is correct, the appropriate contents. Requests the maintaining adjudgment, maintain the decision of reeducation through labor.

The evidence materials submitted to the trial court trial the defendant: for the 1, February 8, 2007, February 10, 2007, February 13, 2007, Wang Yuna, for the 2, March 3rd 2007, March 4, 2007, March 7, 2007, Fang Hongyan, is to prove that Xu Jingquan instigated him illegal crime fact. In February 11, 2007 3, on-the-spot examination transcripts, interrogation record, February 11, 2007 4, February 12, 2007 Xu Jingquan, is to prove that Xu Jingquan has a large number of leaflets and has not yet leaflets consistent. 5, confirmed by Wang Yuna, Fang Hongyan signed four leaflets, 6, Wang Yuna and Fang Hongyan, the site where distributed leaflets posted 12 photos, video monitoring 5 photos and video monitoring disc disc, are used for proving the concoctive fact, libel illegal facts the occurrence of others, and that this behavior is inspired, by Wang Yuna, Fang Hongyan by the specific implementation in Xu Jingquan. 7, Liaozhong County Government Office issued the "about my county five enterprises system description", Liaozhong County People's government (2005) sixth, 8, (2006) 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 executive meeting records, to prove that the case has distributed leaflets content and Xu Jing Quan Ju the ferret out leaflets to deliberate. 8, seized goods list of documents, to prove that Xu Jingquan is not home there are a large number of leaflets and has been circulated slander leaflets consistent. 9, Shen Liao Gong Zhi will word (2007) No. 127 administrative punishment decision, 10, Shen Liao Gong Zhi will word (2007) No. 132 administrative punishment decision, are used to prove that Wang Yuna, Fang Hongyan because of distributing leaflets to slander others already by the public security organs shall be given administrative penalties. 11, March 8, 2007, March 15, 2007, Xu Jingquan in March 20, 2007 to review the record, to prove that the defendant perform the review procedure. 12, Xu Jingquan in March 27, 2007 to hearing transcripts, to prove to Xu Jingquan conducted hearings in accordance with the law and the quality of evidence. 13, announced the "decision of reeducation through labor" records, to prove that the defendant to the plaintiff to inform decisions in accordance with the procedures. 14, the witness, Li Zengchun, Liu Jingsheng, Feng Bing, Gao Yi, Bu Wenguo testimony, to prove the questioning of witnesses Wang Yuna, Fang Hongyan police no inducement behaviors. 15, Mobile Corporation issued the call records, to prove that Xu Jingquan and Wang Yuna and Fang Hongyan call. 16, the magatama Liang confirmed records, to prove that Xu Jingquan not as controlled interview work. 17, two copies of agency personnel Bai Ning, Sun Haijiao confirmed, to prove that Wang Yuna, Fang Hongyan in the public security organs of the testimony is true.

The plaintiff submitted to the evidence materials are: 1, the witness Wang Yuna to testify in court, witnesses to testify in court, Fang Hongyan, 2, were to prove the plaintiff not incite and instigate two witnesses leaflets, and prove that the plaintiff found in home of the leaflet is the confiscation of the two leaflets.

The trial by trial process, on the evidence of the defendant to be admissible. On the plaintiff to provide evidence inadmissible.

After cross examination, the Institute found the evidence authentication is basically correct.

The school according to the effective evidence for ascertaining the facts and the facts are consistent.

This house believes that, according to the "reeducation through labor Trial Measures" the provisions of article eleventh, the appellant Shenyang City reeducation through labor management committee has made a statutory authority decision of reeducation through labor system, the identification of the correct. In this case, the appellee above v. inspired, directs others to distribute, post deliberately propaganda, wantonly slander others, abetting crime, is not enough for criminal punishment, the appellant sentenced to a year of reeducation through labor. The main reason for the appellant Xu Jingquan appeal is Wang Yuna, Fang Hongyan showed that the leaflet behavior and I it doesn't matter. But, Wang Yuna, Fang Hongyan as the witness, the witness testimony in court, not enough to reverse the public security organs identified according to the first two people confessed the contents of the fact, and two people in the proceedings and make statements and opposite the case in public security organs, is not justified, is not sufficient evidence that the public security organs handling in inducement behavior, so the respondent made the decision of reeducation through labor identified clear facts, irrefutable evidence, the appellant fails, the court shall not support.

To sum up, the facts are clear, the evidence, the trial procedures are legitimate, rejected the appellant Xu Jingquan claim the applicable law is correct. In accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" sixty-first (a) the provisions of item, the decision as follows:

Dismiss the appeal, upheld the.

The 50 yuan of case acceptance fee by the appellant Xu Jingquan bear.

This judgment is the final judgment.

Chief justice Zhu Yan

Acting judge Chang Yingmei

Acting judge Zhang Yusheng

Two hundred eight years in April 15th

The clerk Gao Baoxin

 

The relevant legal basis for the decision of this case

"Administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article sixty-first (a): "a people's court, in the light of the following situations, respectively:

(a) in the original judgment, applicable laws, regulations and correct judgment

 

Hou Guiyuan was the appellant Shenyang reeducation through Labor Management Committee decision of reeducation through labor case for V.

-- Liaoning province Shenyang City Intermediate People's Court (2008-4-14)

 

Liaoning province Shenyang City Intermediate People's court

[2008] Shen to end the word no. 113rd

 

The appellant (the plaintiff) Hou Gui Yuan, female, was born in December 18, 1952, Han nationality, no occupation, (omitted).

Attorney: Zhang Shuqing, Zhang Chunlan, the success of Liaoning Golden League lawyer.

Appellee (defendant in the original instance) Shenyang City Labor Education Management Committee, located in Heping District of Shenyang city Zhongshan Road No. 106.

Legal representative: Xu Wenyou, chairman of the committee.

Attorney: Zhao Yang, Liu Lu, the staff of the committee.

The appellant Hou Guiyuan appellee Shenyang reeducation through Labor Management Committee decision of reeducation through labor case for action against Shenyang, Heping District People's Court (2008) and at the beginning of the word no. seventh administrative decision, appeal. The court, a collegial panel, held a public hearing of the case. The attorney agent Zhang Shuqing, Hou Guiyuan and Zhang Chunlan, the appellant Shenyang City reeducation through labor management committee entrusted agent Zhao Yang, Liu Lu attended the court proceedings. Now the trial has been closed.

The cognizance, the plaintiff Hou Guiyuan in May 30, 2007, June 3rd, 11 days, 12 days, 30 days, July 12th, 14 times to Beijing Dongjiao Lane 17, Tiananmen square, the embassy district, regional non petition petition. Because of the petition problem, don't listen to dissuade police, three times by the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau Chaoyang Branch administrative detention; and in July 17, 2007, 25 days, 30 days to place Beijing Zhongnanhai, Wanshou Road No. 15, foreign embassy district to sit, make visit; and the hosting of the Olympic Games countdown to the first anniversary of the machine at Beijing in August 8, 2007, with dozens of people in Beijing's Tiananmen square to sit, shout slogans. The defendant made in September 17, 2007 Shen Lao to teach words [2007]381 decision of reeducation through labor, the Hou Gui Yuan a year of reeducation through labor.

The thought, "reeducation through labor according to the Trial Measures" provisions of article eleventh, the defendant has the statutory authority decision of reeducation through labor system. The defendant provided evidence to prove the existence of the illegal facts the plaintiff Hou Guiyuan has disturbed the work, life order, the reeducation through labor decided that the facts are clear, the evidence is sufficient. The defendant on the basis of reeducation through labor "Trial Measures" article tenth (five), the State Council "Supplementary Provisions" reeducation through labor third to the plaintiff made the decision of reeducation through labor, in accordance with the law, legal procedures. The plaintiff's claim is not based on facts and legal basis, the court shall not support. In accordance with the provisions of the Supreme People's court "about some problems in the implementation of" the people's Republic of China Administrative Procedure Law > explanation "article fifty-sixth (four) the provisions of item, rejected the plaintiff Hou Guiyuan litigation request, the case acceptance fee of 50 yuan, the plaintiff has the burden of Hou Gui Yuan.

The appellant appeals, said Hou Guiyuan, a petitioner not unreasonably make visit, is a rational petition; two, the trial court of appeal without reasonable key evidence identification; three, the decision of reeducation through labor improper application of the law; four, the decision of reeducation through labor program serious illegal. Request the second instance court for revocation of the original judgment, the judgment shall be amended according to.

The appellant Shenyang City reeducation through labor management committee said in reply, the reeducation through labor decided that the facts are clear, the evidence is sufficient, correctly applies the law, legal procedures. Request the court of second instance maintaining adjudgment, rejected the appellant's claim.

The appeal to the trial court for evidence are: 1, the petitions, the treatment decision; 2, to the Shenyang Air Force Logistics Department of Health Office of the letter; 3, apply for disability evaluation report; 4, certificate; 5, disabled revolutionary servicemen disability identification table; 6, about disability, mending, adjust the grade of disability the letter of introduction; 7, the Civil Affairs Bureau of Shenyang; 8, the disability grade medical identification table; 9 - 11, and visits to single; 12, the Beijing matters contact list; 13, about the nature and veterans disability rating certification rules; 14, judgment and housing demolition approval, or evidence to prove that the appellant appeal is rational petition; 15, certificate of disability and medical records, to prove that the Appellant had a serious illness, not the reeducation through labor.

The appellee to the trial court evidence: 1, September 1, 2007 Park police station Xu Lifeng, Liu Jin Wei the testimony, to prove that capture Hou Gui Yuan after; for the 2, August 8, 2007 Zhao Dongsheng, to prove that Hou Gui Yuan by the Beijing Olympic Games countdown to the first anniversary, with dozens of people sitting in Beijing Tiananmen square, do not listen to staff the dissuasion, adhere to sit, not with the car; 3, the August 30, 2007 Yang Chunxiang interrogation record, by August 8, 2007 there are a number of petitioners, meditation, chanting slogans in Tiananmen square in Beijing Hou Gui Yuan involved in this meditation; 4, July 31, 2007, August 8th, September 1st, September 7th when Gui Yuan asked his statement notes and in September 1st, to prove that Hou Guiyuan for relocation compensation do not reach the requirements of many petitions, and in 2007 May to August to Beijing for many times and locations of non make visit, and in August 8, 2007 to Beijing's Tiananmen square in 5, August 15, 2007; that the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau Chaoyang Branch of the public security detachment issued, to prove that Hou Gui Yuan five times to the embassy district "to ocean like", disrupt the work, life order; 6, 2007 In July 20th the certificate issued by Beijing Dongcheng Branch Dongjiao Lane police station by June 3, 2007, when Gui Yuan to Dongjiao Lane 17 non petition District petition, disturb the order, the order of life; 7, the July 20, 2007 Beijing issued by the Municipal Public Security Bureau Branch public security team Tiananmen area of work, to prove that Hou Gui Yuan were on duty the police examined in Tiananmen square; 8, in August 7, 2007 the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau issued by Fuyoujie police work, to prove that Hou Guiyuan in July 17, 2007 to the Zhongnanhai Xinhua Gate non petition site visits, stop not to go, to disrupt the work, life order; 9. Introduced in July 27, 2007 Beijing City Public Security Bureau Haidian branch Wanshou Road police station police Ma Xiaojun, Zou Tong issued by July 25, 2007, Hou Gui Yuan to Beijing Wanshou Road No. 15 non Petition Petition in place, disrupt the work, life order; 10, August 8, 2007, 9, the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau issued by the Tiananmen branch of the security team work instructions two, to prove that Hou Guiyuan in Tiananmen square to participate in illegal gathering, disrupt the work, life order; 11, Shenyang City Public Security Bureau police detachment of Shenyang city in August 8, 2007 to provide petitioners in notes making Tiananmen square meditation CD; 12, audio-visual disc, audio-visual material evidence situation, more than two copies of evidence to prove the August 8, 2007 Hou GUI Judy in Tiananmen square in meditation and chanting slogans, and regardless of the Beijing police discouraged, continue to sit; 13, the CPC Shenyang Municipal Committee, Shenyang Municipal People's Government Office in Beijing stable working group in August 9, 2007 issued by Beijing to petition the list, to prove that Hou Gui Yuan Beijing several times to non Petition Petition Work place, disrupt, order of life; 14, introduction the complaint reporting handling, opinion, Shenyang City Real estate bureau issued by the review comments, review opinions, notes, to prove that Hou Gui Yuan asked to perform City Hall seventeenth orders were given letters demands relocation, no policy basis, no support, Hou Gui Yuan is unreasonable, visit; 15 in Beijing public judgment determines the word [2007] No. 707061st, No. 708275, 708344 number of public security administrative punishment, that Hou Guiyuan was the detention order was disturbing public order three times; 16, ID card, proof of identity of Hou Gui Yuan; 17, Shenyang City Public Security Bureau police detachment in September 1, 2007 about Hou Guiyuan to Beijing to petition site situation shows that Hou Gui Yuan, Beijing to petition the location for the Tiananmen square, Sanlitun, eastern suburbs Min Xiang, Wanshou Road No. 15, Zhongnanhai are non normal petition site; notice and annex 18, big east standard the order in accordance with the law against illegal petitioners project working group issued in accordance with the law, is to prove that research the case handling units; 19, the big east two street community committee issued a Guan Quanyuan case certificate, to prove that Hou Guiyuan was the relocation and resettlement issues often petition, dissuasion; 20 big east two street, a new Chinese community The Commission, to prove that Hou Gui Yuan dissuasion, adhere to the Beijing Sanlitun heads; 21, in September 7, 2007 the Shenyang Municipal Public Security Bureau of legal department to review the record Dadong Subbureau Hou Gui Yuan made, prove the case handling units perform the review process; 22, announced the decision of reeducation through labor book records, to prove to Hou Gui Yuan to fulfill the informing procedure. The appellee had to submit to the court of the State Council "reeducation through labor Trial Measures" article eleventh, article tenth (five), the State Council "reeducation through labor" Supplementary Provisions Article third, as proof of making the decision of reeducation through labor authority basis and make the correct decision of reeducation through labor law applies, the legal procedure.

The trial by trial process, provide evidence for the Appellant was not accepted, the appellee shall be admissible evidence.

The evidence has been transferred to our hospital with the volume.

After review, the court considered that the correct determination of evidence.

The institute according to the facts and the evidence that the same effective.

This house believes that, according to the "Interim Provisions" reeducation through labor to Article eleventh, the appellee has made the decision of reeducation through labor of their statutory functions and powers. The reeducation through labor decided that the facts are clear, the evidence is sufficient, the applicable law is correct, the original judgment rejected the appellant's claim, there is no improper. In accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article sixty-first (a) of the Convention, the decision as follows:

Dismiss the appeal, upheld the;

The second case acceptance fee 50 yuan, shall be borne by the appellant Hou Guiyuan.

This judgment is the final judgment.

 

The trial has grown son of Ding

Acting judge Dong Nan

Acting judge Li Chunye

 

Two 00 eight years in April 14th

 

The clerk Gao Baoxin

The relevant legal basis for the decision of this case

"Administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" sixty-first when a people's court, in the light of the following situations, respectively:

(a) in the original judgment, applicable laws, regulations and correct judgement, dismissed the appeal, upheld the;

(two) in the original judgment, but the application of laws and regulations, the wrong, the judgment shall be amended according to;

(three) the original judgment facts unclear, insufficient evidence, or a violation of the statutory procedures may affect the correct judgment of the case, rescind the original judgment, the people's court remanded retrial, can also find out the facts adjudged. The parties to the case for retrial judgment, ruling, can appeal.

 

On theSea city reeducation through labor management committee and the China light ray, Xiao Jiapin, Xiao Pengfei, the decision of reeducation through labor

-- the Chongqing second intermediate people's Court (2008-2-28)

 

Chongqing second intermediate people's court

Administrative judgment

(2008) two Chongqing China and France to end the word no. thirtieth

The appellant (defendant in the original instance) Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee, address: Shanghai Fuzhou Road City No. 185.

Legal representative: Miu Xiaobao, director of.

Appellee (the plaintiff) Leihua light, male, was born in November 3, 1963, Han nationality, primary school culture, identity card number (omitted). Domicile: (omitted).

Appellee (the plaintiff) Xiao Jiapin, male, was born in April 27, 1967, Han nationality, culture of junior high school, ID number (omitted). Domicile: (omitted).

Appellee (the plaintiff) Xiao Pengfei, male, was born in August 10, 1988, Han nationality, culture of junior high school, ID number (omitted). Domicile: (omitted).

The appellant Shanghai reeducation through labor management committee for decision of reeducation through labor case, the Kaixian people's Court (2007) at the beginning of the word no. twenty-eighth train administrative judgment, appeal to the court. The court, a collegial panel, "according to the provisions of the administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" in article fifty-ninth, the case of a written hearing. Now the trial has been closed.

In October 8, 2007, Shanghai City reeducation through labor management committees to obstructing public duties, "reeducation through labor according to the Trial Measures" article tenth (five) regulations, thirteenth of thunder China lamp, Xiao Jiapin, Xiao Pengfei decided for a year of reeducation through labor.

The plaintiffs claimed: September 13, 2007 at noon, Sanyuan reports after work just returned home (Shanghai temporary residence), to the two police and a social security member previous fighting things found the plaintiff Leihua light, and will take a police car. Ray himself did not fight, not to the police, the police immediately grabbed Lei hair to pour in the ground, and grabbed his throat, with the legs on the chest. The plaintiff Xiao Jiapin see the police beat, forward questioned why beatings, and called his son Xiao Pengfei to take the camera scene evidence, the police and the plaintiff Shaw wrestled to the ground and the throat. The plaintiff Xiao Pengfei take the camera back, the police will not let its shooting, see the police for playing the father and the police ethics, the police think Xiao Pengfei hampered the execution of business, forced to pull the car. After the defendant to Sanyuan to respectively through a year, Sanyuan to revoke the defendant refuses to accept the request, the detention decision.

The defendant argued that: in September 13, 2007, the police received 110 alarm to Pudong New Area North Cai town Yu Qiao Cun, near the city of the police. According to the police alarm accusations, summoned verbally Leihua light, thunder refused, police said to ray mandatory summon, ray refused to summon and pushing the police, wearing glasses knocked to the ground, police again to the thunder of mandatory summon, Xiao Pengfei holding a bamboo chair, Xiao the handheld reinforced resist police, after all uniforms and called in the police car, Xiao Pengfei to the police for assault. I appoint to Sanyuan to make the detention a year decided facts are clear, sufficient evidence, legal procedures, correct application of laws and regulations, request the court to maintain.

Kaixian people's court found, eleven thirty on September 13, 2007 Liu Hongtong driving a motorcycle in the non motor vehicle lanes to exercise a dispute with the cart of migrant workers in Shanghai City, Pudong New Area, Shanghai south bus station at the Royal Bridge, was played after the alarm, police Hu Xiaofeng, Zhang Huaming, social security team Zhou Wei after the alarm to Pudong New Area North Cai town Yu Qiao Cun police of the city. To the scene, beat Liu Hung Tung has left the scene, the police to identify the ray light is called "Liu beaten people walking person. The police Hu Xiaofeng asked ray fight people gone, the thunder does not answer, Hu Xiaofeng summoned verbally shocked police station, ray felt that he did not hit are reluctant to go to the police station and not on the police car, Hu Xiaofeng announced the mandatory summon the thunder, and hands-on Raleigh on the police car, Lei said he didn't play the people refused to sit in the car, pulled a dispute, pushing, ray was wrestled to the ground, and flurry will Hu Xiaofeng wearing glasses fall off. The people around think the police law enforcement is improper, will Hu Xiaofeng and Zhou Wei Wei, Hu Xiaofeng, call in reinforcements. The police Jin Minghua rushed to the scene, again on the thunder of mandatory summon, Xiao Jiapin said that if the thunder hit people go to, if not up won't go, and that his son Xiao Pengfei to borrow the camera photographed the scene, so with the dispute occurred, pull. Xiao Pengfei borrow the camera back to the scene to see the police forced to pull his father Xiao the police, he kicked the police, security team member Zhou Wei approached Xiao Pengfei to pour in the ground, Xiao Pengfei got up and picked up the mud throwing social security team and picked up a bamboo chair to hit the social members, police will bamboo chair off to get the police, forced to get in Xiao Pengfei on the police car, Xiao Pengfei did not want to get with the Police Gold Minghua happened crowds, with his hands on his neck when the police off wearing police neck badge. Xiao Jiapin saw his son was caught, he picked up a bar for the police, police shout down; after three the plaintiff was police back to the police station. In the police car Xiao Pengfei and Jin Minghua dispute, with the foot against Jin Minghua. On the same day, Beicai station were asked to Sanyuan reports and Liu Quanchang, Xiao Sanhua, Liu Hongtong, morrow Sanyuan to criminal detention, and told the detained three days. In September 13th fifteen of criminal investigation team Hu Xiaofeng, Jin Minghua, Zhou Wei were asked, on the same day making inspection notification and identification of attorney and mark Hu Xiaofeng, Jin Minghua does not constitute a slight injury. In September 17th the interrogation of Xiao Jiapin, Xiao Pengfei, 19 days of thunder China lamp for questioning. In the Criminal Investigation Brigade under the auspices of, Hu Xiaofeng identified the photos, affirmation is three the plaintiff. In September 20th the battalion of the criminal investigation that three plaintiffs cannot be investigated for criminal responsibility, the reporting of reeducation through labor. In October 8th the defendant (2007) Shanghai Lao Wei Shen Zi No. 7505th decision of reeducation through labor, Sanyuan reports are that can truthfully confession the illegal act, to its guilty of obstructing public duties behavior were lighter containing a year of reeducation through labor. The decision in October 11th to the Pudong New Area detention center, make a release certificate, Sanyuan reports were subsequently sent to the labor camp. In October 23rd the three plaintiffs sued to revoke the defendant to make the detention decision.

Kaixian people's court that, reeducation through labor is a compulsory education and reform of minor illegal crime personnel administrative means mandatory measures, is a very strict restriction of personal freedom, although not classified as administrative punishment, but from the view of time and level of restrictions on personal freedom, than the administrative penalties in the human body the penalty is heavy, the right of personal liberty is one of the most basic human rights, labor regulations in the developed initially to maintain social order has played a positive role, although not abolished, but in practical application should advance with the times, strict control of. Illegal punishment by (physical) must be consistent with the illegal behaviors and consequences, from the case nature, motivation, cause, especially the development of the plot (harm) to consider, not arbitrarily decided. According to the "measures" the trial of reeducation through labor and related regulations, the object is a minor offence facts. First, in the case of Sanyuan told only minor violations, no criminal facts, but according to the records of the public security organ materials, Sanyuan told no criminal record; by second, this case is mainly the police summoned the thunder light not to say was summoned reason, individual police law enforcement caused by third, rude; the defendant found Leihua light will police wearing glasses knocked to the ground, according to the materials and the process that occurred view belongs to the thunder China lamp by the police according to the normal emergency response to pour in the ground after the break; that Xiao Pengfei police badge, from materials reflect with the pulling process Xiao accidentally broke the chain the police badge; fourth, Xiao Jiapin was the police forcibly sent to police when the revolt, dispute, and pulled the police, this is a previously non criminal instinct reaction, can automatically drop in its get reinforced ready for action only when police growl, no further action. The defendant to the plaintiff in make the detention decision confirmed the plaintiff can truthfully confessed the fact, but there is a great difference in the content of the statement and decided that, that is not comprehensive and objective description of its occurrence and development process, the qualitative effects. This case report is not others Sanyuan public order cases behavior person or party, is not willing to accept the public security organs of the subpoena is normal reaction of ordinary people, and the police on the verbal summons the lack of convincing when the implementation of mandatory summon, the plaintiff against scratching and there, not three plaintiffs have active attacking motivation or behavior. Xiao Jiapin, Xiao Pengfei put down violence appliances, nor on the police caused minor damage, and then with the police work, the social harm is not big, the slight illegal behavior does not constitute the reeducation through labor. "Reeducation through labor Trial Measures" article tenth (five) regulations, work unit, the long-term damage to refuse to work, labor discipline, and constantly make trouble out of nothing, disrupt the order of production, work order, teaching and living order, obstruction, do not listen to advice and stop, reeducation through labor. In this case the defendant the plaintiff identified three "obstruction", but there is no evidence that the volume of material in the "do not listen to advice and stop", so it should not be the detention. The defendant is the management authority of reeducation through labor, with the decision of reeducation through labor authority, but on the three the plaintiff did not consider the above factors. From the above objective analysis, the defendant to Sanyuan to detention violates the principle of fairness and justice, is not entirely out of the public interest management, a departure from the laws and regulations authorized purpose, belonging to the breach of privilege, according to the administrative procedure law article fifty-fourth (two) fourth provisions, the decision to withdraw the defendant Shanghai City Management Committee of reeducation through labor in October 8, 2007 to the plaintiff thunder China light, Xiao Jiapin, Xiao Pengfei (2007) made of Shanghai Labor Affairs Shen Zi No. 7505th decision of reeducation through labor; the 50 yuan of case acceptance fee, by the Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee burden.

The appellant Shanghai reeducation through labor management committee refuses to accept the decision to appeal, the appellant to three by the appellant to make the decision of reeducation through labor is not only legal in form, but in essence is due to the illegal facts, the appellee's character, plot, motivation and degree of damage factors such as comprehensive as comprehensive consideration, this decided that the facts are clear, the evidence is sufficient, the applicable law is correct, in compliance with the statutory procedures. Request for revocation (2007) at the beginning of the word no. twenty-eighth train administrative judgment; maintain the appellant (2007) Shanghai Lao Wei Shen Zi No. 7505th decision of reeducation through labor; the second one, the cost of litigation by the respondent burden.

Three the appellee appellee argued, no illegal behavior, the object is not the police summoned police summons procedures; violation of the provisions of the law; evidence collection procedure the appellant provides illegal; the appellant of the appellee on implementation of reeducation through labor. Court finds that the facts are clear, legal proceedings, request rejected the appellant's appeal, upheld the.

The defendant in the first instance provides the following evidence within the statutory time limit: 1, Shanghai City Labor Education Management Committee (2007) Shanghai Lao Wei Shen Zi No. 7505th the decision of reeducation through labor, proof of Sanyuan told guilty of obstructing public duties behavior respectively received 1 years of reeducation through labor; 2, two and 00 in September 25th seven, Shanghai City Public Security Bureau of Pudong branch to the defendant's (2007) Hugong Pu Lao Zi No. 765 instructions, plans to sue the Sanyuan approval through a year and three months; 3, the detention decision book delivery receipt, registered mail receipt notice, the reeducation through labor, to prove that the defendant in 2007 on 11 October three the plaintiff deliver and execute the detention; 4, to query notification delivery receipt, to prove that the defendant to the plaintiff sent three hearings this book; 5, case registration form and a decision on filing a case, proves the case the defendant; 6, September 14, 2007 detained certificate and certificate of release, prove Sanyuan told Beixing Ju to October 11, 2007; in September 13, 2007 7, Beicai police station on Leihua light inquiry in September 14, 2007, 19 criminal record, fifteen battalion of Interpol Leihua light interrogation record, September 25, 2007 Pudong Public Security Bureau Office of legal staff of thunder For the bright lights. In September 13, 2007 8, Beicai police station to Xiao Pengfei interrogation record, in September 14, 2007, 17, the Criminal Investigation Brigade of fifteen Xiao Pengfei interrogation record, September 25, 2007 Pudong Public Security Bureau Office of legal interrogation record of Xiao Pengfei. In September 13, 2007 9, Beicai police station to Xiao Jiapin interrogation record, September 14, 2007 September 17th fifteen, Criminal Investigation Brigade to Xiao Jiapin interrogation record, in September 25, 2007, Pudong Public Security Bureau Office of legal interrogation record of Xiao Jiapin. For the 10, September 13, 2007 fifteen to the police police criminal investigation team Hu Xiaofeng. In September 13, 2007 11, the Criminal Investigation Brigade of fifteen Interpol police Jin Minghua interrogation record. 12, Zhou Wei's September 13, 2007 statement. In September 13, 2007 13, Beicai police station to Liu Quanchang interrogation record. 14, Beicai police station to Xiao Sanhua interrogation record. 15, Kita Chae police station to Liu Hongtong interrogation record. 16, Hu Xiaofeng, Jin Minghua, Zhou Wei, Liu Quanchang, Xiao Sanhua, Liu Hongtong recognizable photograph records, identify the Sanyuan to tell the system that clashed with police. 17, Pudong public security sub clinical inspection notice and disability identification center of forensic injury to Hu Xiaofeng, Jin Minghua, Zhou Wei's expertise proxy (Hu Xiaofeng, Jin Minghua), it does not constitute a slight injury. In September 25, 2007 18, the criminal investigation team to fifteen police injured players and social security does not constitute a slight injury, unable to Sanyuan to criminal punishment and the reeducation through labor. 19, 110 case registration form that police basis. 20, the police Jin Minghua badge, Hu Xiaofeng's glasses. The officer certificate copy 21, Jin Minghua, Hu Xiaofeng, showed the legitimacy of alarm. The basic situation of the 22, three. 23, rules, regulations. The direction of the court the plaintiff evidence of Deng Guangcui, Kang Dingju, Huang Haihong, Hu Qingneng, Hu Qingcai, Lei Youyong, Deng Zhangao, Zhang Yingfang's records of investigation.

Kaixian people's court review of that, the sources of evidence and form submitted by the defendant's legal records, objectively, and the case has relevance, effective evidence. The plaintiff to provide evidence that the content and the plaintiffs in the same restrictions on freedom of statement, can be used as evidence of the facts of the case.

The above evidence with the case the court, upon examination, the court of first instance of the evidence admissible correctly, the fact that the court for confirmation.

This house believes that, the focus of controversy in this case is that the appellee is consistent with the object of reeducation through labor and conditions. This, according to the cause, the appellee behavior character, plot, consequences and social harmfulness of comprehensive judgment.

One, the public security organ summoned Leihua light behavior is the official behavior in the execution of his duty, but the act inappropriately is the cause of the appellee resistance behavior. According to the "Public Security Management Punishment Law" provisions of the people's Republic of China in eighty-second, the public security organ summoned acts violating the administration of public security men, should be the cause and basis of summoned to the summoned. Looking from this case, the policemen in the survey asked ray lantern, lantern Yinlei not matching the subpoena, not explicitly told the subpoena reason and evidence, violating procedure. In addition, the thunder China light resistance caused by the crowd and Xiao summoned the police clashed with the case, law enforcement officers did not pass in advance to explain the situation to persuade education way to calm things down, and directly take compulsory means to the Xiao, finally led to Shaw home goods, between Xiao Pengfei and law enforcement officers, scratching tearing behavior, law violates the principle of civilized law enforcement to a certain extent. Because, relative to the respondent, the case law enforcement police should have legal quality, Xiao Jiapin et al. Impede the enforcement of the tendency in the field, may lead to the expansion of the situation of the case, the police first necessary explanations and legal consequences of advertising, to avoid further intensification of contradictions, should be the right choice.

Two, the resistance behavior of illegal acts obstructing public duties. According to the principles of administrative law, under normal circumstances, to make administrative act once, on the presumption that it has the legal effect, namely that force, binding force, executive force. Even if the behavior is illegal or improper, the organ which has the power to revoke the correct before, shall comply with the relative person. Although the public security organs in performing their duties are inappropriate, but at the time of the incident should be identified as the official behavior effectively, the appellee still subject to obligations. The appellee resist law enforcement, and tear, tear and law enforcement personnel, a crime of obstruction. The act does not constitute a crime, therefore, are generally illegal appellant resist law enforcement behavior belongs to the obstruction of justice.

Three, the appellee obstruction episodes, consequences and social harmfulness does not meet the conditions of reeducation through labor. Reeducation through labor is coercive measures of a very strict restriction of personal freedom, the sanctions strength over administrative penalties in the heaviest penalty personal punishment. Although the "pilot scheme" reeducation through labor reeducation through labor for impeding the sanctions, but in the law as "the people's Republic of China Public Security Management Punishment Law" on the obstruction of official sanctions to the new requirements under the condition of "trial measures, for" reeducation through labor should be cautious, to reflect the internal coordination and "Public Security Management Punishment Law" of the people's Republic of China apply cohesion and a system of laws and regulations. The plot, consequences, social harmfulness situation when violations over "Public Security Management Punishment Law" provisions of the people's Republic of China shall be given a heavier case is the highest, "reeducation through labor" Trial Measures for sanctions to violations of reflected violations and the consequences as the principle, just highlight the law applicable. In this case the respondent and law enforcement personnel due to improper enforcement occur pulling, tearing, although aggressive behavior, but not to resist law enforcement, the general performance is still impede public behavior, this behavior except the direct consequence of causing slight injury on the police, not causing other serious consequences, especially the occurrence of illegal behavior are temporary and sudden, illegal after the appellee can recognize the behavior, the less likely to endanger the society again, the above situation shows that, the illegal acts on the appellee obstruction can be dealt with leniently. In the absence of sufficient evidence to show that the appellee impeding illegalities behavior than the "people's Republic of China Public Security Management Punishment Law" article twentieth, the provisions of article fiftieth the situation is more serious, and a situation, "the people's public security management for Republic of punishment law" regulations can not only achieve the sanctions the purpose of illegal behavior of the appellee, and in accordance with the idea of justice is common. The appeal for "reeducation through labor Trial Measures" article tenth (five), the provisions of article thirteenth of the respondent to make the decision of reeducation through labor, which belongs to the improper application of the law.

To sum up, the appellee impeding behavior does not accord with the object of reeducation through labor and conditions, the appellant to (2007) Shanghai Labor Affairs Shen Zi No. 7505th decision of reeducation through labor erroneous application of the law, in accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article fifty-fourth (two) second provisions, it shall be revoked. The judgment of the first instance that the appellant to reeducation through labor decision contrary to the public interest management purposes, which belongs to the behavior of breach of privilege, the lack of evidence to support the application of administrative procedure law, "" the people's Republic of China article fifty-fourth (two) of this fourth provisions are also applicable law, improper, the corrected. But the original trial verdict, clear the basic facts, legal procedures, revocation of the appellant to make the decision of reeducation through labor decision result is correct, should be maintained. In accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article sixty-first (a) of the Convention, the decision as follows:

Dismiss the appeal, upheld the.

The appeal court costs 50 yuan, by the appellant Shanghai reeducation through labor management committee burden.

This judgment is the final judgment.

Chief justice Tu Ping

Judge Chen Kemei

Judge Tang Hua

Acting judge Zhang Jianping

Acting judge Cheng Hongsheng

 

Two hundred eight years in February 28th

The clerk Zhang Rongxia

The appellant and appellee Xu Qiyong Chongqing Wanzhou reeducation through labor drug management administrative compensation case

-- the Chongqing second intermediate people's Court (2007-7-30)

 

Chongqing second intermediate people's court

Administrative compensation judgments

(2007) two Chongqing bank terminal No. forty-sixth

The appellant (the plaintiff) Xu Qiyong, male, was born in March 21, 1972, Han nationality, live (omitted), now the city of Chongqing in Wanzhou reeducation through labor detoxification drug management.

Agent Ou Jinglan, Xu Qiyong's mother.

Agent Liu Shangde, live in Liangping County of Liangshan Town Road No. 405.

Appellee (defendant in the original instance) Chongqing city Wanzhou reeducation through labor drug management.

Legal representative: Xie Zirong, director of the.

Attorney: Luo Jun, chief of the legal section.

Attorney Yang Lu Sheng, the cadres.

The appellant Xu Qiyong for administrative compensation case, the people's Court of Wanzhou district (2007) million lines for No. first administrative compensation decision, appeal to the court. The court, a collegial panel, the case was heard, has now been finalized.

The identified: the plaintiff Xu Qiyong and Yu Xilong, Liu Yunchuan, Zhang Yongjun, the defendant Chongqing city Wanzhou reeducation through labor management for drug treatment of prisoners. On July 29, 2006 morning 8 when make, Yu Xilong in reeducation through labor personnel art workshop to see Xu Qiyong walking back and forth, in the workshop of roadway asked Xu: stem what? Xu a: find the bench. Because of the Xu answered the voice of big, Yu felt against, he beat Xu Qiyong head, face. Liu Yunchuan, Zhang Yong sees inmates have stepped forward, together with Yu Xilong Xu Qiyong were beaten to the ground, Xu shouted for help, was rushed to the police on duty to stop, and will Xu Qiyong sent to the hospital for treatment, diagnosis of ruptured into the damage, delayed spleen, and implement the operation to remove the spleen, to medical costs 10156.89 yuan the cost paid by the defendant. After the Public Security Bureau of Wanzhou District of Chongqing City Criminal Identification of science and technology, Xu Qiyong's injury is serious. In 2006 August 16 by the Chongqing city Wanzhou District People's Procuratorate approved the arrest of the three people such as Yu Xilong. In 2006 September 21 by Chongqing municipal judicial identification center of Chongqing identified Xu Qiyong disability department eight level of disability. In November 2, 2006, the people's Court of Wanzhou District in prison for the three people such as Yu Xilong sentenced to intentionally harm. In October 24, 2006, the plaintiff Xu Qiyong to the defendant for dereliction of duty on the grounds, the applications for administrative compensation to the defendant, requirements for compensation in accordance with the "State Compensation Law" of the relevant provisions. The defendant made in November 8, 2006 (2006) No. third Wan Lao ring for the decision on administrative compensation decides not to make compensation, also asked Xu Qiyong to return to advance the medical expenses of 10156.89 yuan. The plaintiff against Xu Qiyong in January 17, 2007 to institute prosecution requests the defendant of administrative compensation.

The plaintiff Xu Qiyong think, refuses to accept the decision to the defendant Wanzhou reeducation through labor administrative compensation, provided to the Institute for administrative compensation litigation in accordance with the law on state compensation. The plaintiff Xu Qiyong dispute due to a quarrel with Yu Xilong, leading to the three people such as Yu Xilong beaten and injured the facts established, the court be identified. But the disputes, Xu Qiyong Yu Xilong and others directly responsible. The Wanzhou facility as the legal supervision organs, to protect the life and health has responsibility for supervision personnel of reeducation through labor, Xu Qiyong injured in the labor workshop, the defendant should bear the lax supervision negligence. Considering the supervision behavior the occurrence process and results in damage to the size effect and the plaintiff filed civil compensation to the right of the direct infringer Yu Xilong et al., the court decision defendant should give appropriate compensation for the plaintiff. According to the "PRC State Compensation Law" article twenty-seventh (two) and "the Supreme People's Court on the public security organs do not perform their statutory duties should take the responsibility of administrative compensation replied" (France - [2001]23) regulations, judgment, the defendant Chongqing City, Wanzhou: a reeducation through labor drug management compensation the plaintiff Xu Qiyong compensation 15000 yuan, in addition to the product has advance medical expenses 10156.89 yuan, the actual compensation the plaintiff Xu Qiyong 4843.11 yuan. This section of the entry into force of this ruling by the defendant to pay the plaintiff after a one-time. Two, rejected the plaintiff Xu Qiyong's other claims. Xu Qiyong in "the fact is subjective, and erroneous application of the law and the procedural law" on the grounds, the appeal to the hospital.

The court will be the case with the case has been transferred to our hospital evidence, after the trial, the trial that the facts clearly, confirmation.

This house believes that: Xu Qiyong is the management of personnel of reeducation through labour, the appellee should Xu Qiyong health have oversight responsibilities. Xu Qiyong in the labor workshop with reeducation through labor disputes because Yu Xilong quarrel, Yu Xilong and so on three persons undergoing reeducation through labor beating the injury, the appellee shall bear the lax supervision responsibility. Because of Xu Qiyong's injury, Yu Xilong three people should be caused by, the civil suit for compensation of the damages by the first Xu Qiyong, three direct infringement liability. If the people's court direct tortfeasor to completely fulfill the civil liability for compensation shall be exempted from liability, by the appellant. If the people's court direct tortfeasor is not completely fulfill the liability for compensation, the people's court shall determine the amount of compensation according to the size of the fault by the appellant. However, Xu Qiyong gave up the civil compensation, to Yu Xilong and so on three direct tortfeasor so, Xu Qiyong asked the appellee assume full liability not support the request. Therefore, the trial court according to regulatory action by the appellant in the damage process and results of the size effect and Xu Qiyong still enjoys civil rights to compensation to the direct infringer, give appropriate compensation is not inappropriate decision. Xu Qiyong said the appeal in the trial court did not organize the debate is in violation of the statutory procedures, after examination, the two sides on the validity of evidence in proof quality certification process, the focus of the debate the quality, although there is no debate stage alone, the debate in the interrogation process were introduced, thus, should be the procedural defects. The facts are clear, the legal procedure, the applicable law is correct, Xu Qiyong grounds of appeal can not be established. In accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" sixty-first (a) the provisions of item, the decision as follows:

Dismiss the appeal, upheld the.

This judgment is the final judgment.

Chief justice Tu Ping

Judge Tang Hua

Judge Cheng Hongsheng

Two hundred seven years in July thirty

The clerk Zhang Rongxia

He Qing v. Dongguan City reeducation through labor management committee of reeducation through labor administrative compulsory appeal case

Guangdong Province -- Foshan City Intermediate People's Court (2006-6-5)

 

Guangdong Province Foshan City Intermediate People's court

Administrative judgment

(2006) the Buddha France to end the word no. forty-first

The appellant (the plaintiff): He Qing, male, Han nationality, born in October 5, 1984, lived in (omitted).

Attorney: Li Wenqun, lawyer letter and guangdong.

Attorney: Zhang Wenxing, lawyer assistant and Guangdong letter.

Appellee (defendant in the original instance): Dongguan City Labor Education Management committee. Address: Dongguan East Road No. 3.

Legal representative: Zhang Jixiong, director of.

Attorney: Zeng Dong, Dongguan City Public Security Bureau legal department clerk.

Attorney: Chen Xueke, Dongguan City Public Security Bureau legal department clerk.

The appellant because He Qing v. Dongguan Municipal Management Committee of reeducation through labor reeducation through labor administrative enforcement case, not Foshan Sanshui District People's Court (2005) three method for early word no. twenty-first administrative decision, appeal to the court. This court formed a collegiate bench, the case was heard, has now been finalized.

The facts: in June 10, 2005, Dongguan city Dalang town Jiarong mall, mall, near Hong Li Chang Fu Lu pedestrian street and other places, happened to disturb the social public security events. Then gathered some trouble people free after playing the local motorcycle drivers and passengers, down beat, hit the motorcycle. The plaintiff He Qing participated in the riot, and smashed his motorcycle. Dongguan City Public Security Bureau to take decisive measures, timely put down a riot scene, caught the plaintiff and other disturbances personnel. After that, the defendant Dongguan City reeducation through labor management committee made Dong Lao will word (2005) No. 341st "the decision of reeducation through labor", decided to reeducation through labor for the plaintiff, the plaintiff refuses to accept this and bring an administrative lawsuit.

The court considers that, according to the "Interim Provisions" reeducation through labor to article fourth, article eleventh, the defendant is entitled to make the decision of reeducation through labor authority for the plaintiff He Qing in accordance with the law. The defendant Dongguan City reeducation through labor management committee that the plaintiff has trouble together disorderly events in behavior based on survey evidence, the evidence is sufficient. The plaintiff is provocative acts, in accordance with asylum reeducation through labor conditions, the defendant in accordance with the "reeducation through labor Trial Measures" article tenth (four) of the Convention, to make the decision of reeducation through labor to the plaintiff, the applicable law is correct. The plaintiff that the defendant made the decision of reeducation through labor facts unclear, insufficient evidence, the reason is not sufficient, the court will not be accepted. The plaintiff that the defendant made the decision of reeducation through labor, in violation of the "administrative punishment law" the relevant provisions of the people's Republic of China, the illegal procedure. According to the "Interim Provisions" reeducation through labor to article second, "reeducation through labor, the labor education and rehabilitation of people compulsory education and reform of administrative measures......" Therefore, the reeducation through labor, does not apply to "the people's Republic of China on Administrative Punishment Law" the relevant provisions of the procedures. The relevant provisions of the Trial Measures for "reeducation through labor" to make the decision of reeducation through labor legal procedures for the plaintiff. It claims the plaintiff, not a good enough reason, the court will not be accepted. To sum up, the defendant made the East Lao will word (2005) No. 341st "the decision of reeducation through labor", finds that the facts are clear, the evidence is sufficient, the applicable law is correct, in accordance with legal procedures, in accordance with the law shall be maintained. Sixth the decision to revoke the defendant in the plaintiff's request, inadequate justifications, the court shall not support. In accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article fifty-fourth (a) the provisions of item, decision: to maintain the defendant Dongguan City East labor reeducation through labor management committee will word (2005) No. 341st "the decision of reeducation through labor" in the sixth book. The 100 yuan of case acceptance fee shall be borne by the plaintiff He Qing.

The appellant may appeal against the judgment he Qing, said: first, the first instance court ascertained that the facts unclear, insufficient evidence. 1 the first instance court ascertained that the appellant He Qing in June 10, 2005 more than 2 pm in Dongguan Changfu pedestrian street in trouble, but not the victims to identify and recognize the people involved. No witnesses and other evidence that the appellant in trouble. Although Zhang Guojian recognize the appellant in Changfu street, but did not confirm the appellant in trouble. 2 the case facts unclear, insufficient evidence, more need to appeal to appear in court to explain the situation, and the court of first instance did not let the appeal court, deprived of the right to defend myself. Two, the appellant Dongguan City reeducation through labor management committee to make the decision of reeducation through labor program illegal, erroneous application of the law. 1 the reeducation through labor shall be the administrative penalty, but not compulsory administrative measures, which should be "administrative punishment law" constraint. The respondent did not according to the stipulation of "administrative punishment law" thirty-first shall notify the parties shall enjoy rights. The appellee did not form a collegiate group written examination and interrogation of the appellant, the evidence submitted did not submit a number of reports of "reeducation through labor" to listen to the reporting units, no service "the decision of reeducation through labor" to appeal to people's family announced the decision of reeducation through labor, on the basis of facts, period, and the appellant rights in accordance with the law. The 2 respondent is made of reeducation through labor decision on appeal to "reeducation through labor Trial Measures" the provisions of article tenth, but according to the "measures" the provisions of article ninth, the appellant Home Furnishing rural, by the end of 2004 veterans, to the Dongguan City Houjie Baiqi St. Ma furniture company as a security guard, until 05 years 5 at the end of the month to learn to drive to quit, not from one place to another person, not the object of reeducation through labor. The request for revocation of the original judgment: 1; 2 revocation East Lao (2005) No. 341st "the decision of reeducation through labor" sixth decisions; 3 by the appellant a second trial, legal fees.

The appellant Dongguan City reeducation through labor committee did not reply in defense during the second instance.

After review, the trial court trial testimony and evidence of legitimate and effective, can prove the facts, the court for confirmation.

This house believes that, according to the "Interim Provisions" reeducation through labor to article fourth, article eleventh, the appellant Dongguan City reeducation through Labor Committee as the management work of reeducation through labor administrative departments in accordance with the law, have the right to exercise the functions and powers to make the decision of reeducation through labor. According to the respondent to provide the appellant He Qing my confession material, Co Zhang Guojian's identification record, and live the events related to the exploration site photos, record, orientation map evidence enough to prove that the appellant, at noon of June 10, 2005, in Dongguan City, Dalang mayor Fu Road Pedestrian Street in the affray facts. The appellee according to the relevant provisions of "Trial Measures" reeducation through labor, the appeal made by East Lao word (2005) No. 341st "the decision of reeducation through labor" sixth decision of reeducation through labor, the genus, finds that the facts are clear, the evidence is sufficient, the applicable law is correct, should be supported. The appellant filed an appeal, the appellee made the decision of reeducation through labor is insufficient evidence, illegal procedure, the trial court improperly. But according to the respondent to provide to the appellant's interrogation, co workers Zhang Guojian identifies the record, as well as between scene investigation transcripts, photo, range map evidence corroborate each other, the appellant is involved in the trouble has proved. The appellant claims the lack of factual and legal basis, the court shall not support. The judgement of the lower court to maintain the Dongguan Management Committee of reeducation through labor East Lao will word (2005) No. 341st "the decision of reeducation through labor" in the sixth correct, in accordance with the law shall be maintained. In accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article sixty-first (a) of the Convention, the decision as follows:

Dismiss the appeal, upheld the.

The second instance procedure fee 100 yuan by the appellant Heqing bear.

This judgment is the final judgment.

 

Chief justice Xie Shaoqing

Judge Yang Xiaoyun

Acting judge Zhou Gang

 

Two hundred six years in June 5th

The clerk Wang Lulu

Zhang Guojian v. Dongguan City reeducation through labor management committee of reeducation through labor administrative appeal case

Guangdong Province -- Foshan City Intermediate People's Court (2006-6-5)

 

Guangdong Province Foshan City Intermediate People's court

Administrative judgment

(2006) the Buddha France to end the word no. fortieth

The appellant (the plaintiff): Zhang Guojian, male, the Han nationality, born in October 13, 1976, lived in (omitted)

Attorney: Ceng Haibo, Hunan and Dongguan branch law firm lawyers.

Appellee (defendant in the original instance): Dongguan City Labor Education Management committee. Address: Dongguan East Road No. 3.

Legal representative: Zhang Jixiong, director of.

Attorney: Zeng Dong, Dongguan City Public Security Bureau legal department clerk.

Attorney: Chen Xueke, Dongguan City Public Security Bureau legal department clerk.

The appellant Zhang Guojian for reeducation through labor administrative v. Dongguan Municipal Management Committee of reeducation through labor decision refuses to accept the case, Foshan Sanshui District People's Court (2005) three method for early word no. twentieth administrative decision, appeal to the court. This court formed a collegiate bench, the case was heard, has now been finalized.

The facts: in June 10, 2005, Dongguan city Dalang town Jiarong mall, mall, near Hong Li Chang Fu Lu pedestrian street and other places, happened to disturb the social public security events. Then gathered some trouble people free after playing the local motorcycle drivers and passengers, down beat, hit the motorcycle. The plaintiff Zhang Guojian joined the Mob Events, and smashed his motorcycle. Dongguan City Public Security Bureau to take decisive measures, timely put down a riot scene, caught the plaintiff and other disturbances personnel. After that, the defendant Dongguan City reeducation through labor management committee made Dong Lao will word (2005) No. 341st "the decision of reeducation through labor", decided to reeducation through labor for the plaintiff, the plaintiff refuses to accept this and bring an administrative lawsuit.

The court considers that, according to the "Interim Provisions" reeducation through labor to article fourth, article eleventh, the defendant Dongguan City reeducation through labor management committee to make the decision of reeducation through labor authority for the plaintiff Zhang Guojian in accordance with the law. According to the investigation of the evidence that the plaintiff has trouble together disorderly events in the behavior, the evidence is sufficient. The plaintiff is provocative acts, in accordance with asylum reeducation through labor conditions, the defendant in accordance with the "reeducation through labor Trial Measures" article tenth (four) of the Convention, to make the decision of reeducation through labor to the plaintiff, the applicable law is correct. The plaintiff that the defendant made the decision of reeducation through labor facts unclear, insufficient evidence, the reason is not sufficient, the court will not be accepted. The plaintiff that the defendant made the decision of reeducation through labor, in violation of the "administrative punishment law" the relevant provisions of the people's Republic of China, the illegal procedure. According to the "Interim Provisions" reeducation through labor to article second, "reeducation through labor, the labor education and rehabilitation of people compulsory education and reform of administrative measures......" Therefore, the reeducation through labor, does not apply to "the people's Republic of China on Administrative Punishment Law" the relevant provisions of the procedures. The relevant provisions of the Trial Measures for "reeducation through labor" to make the decision of reeducation through labor legal procedures for the plaintiff. It claims the plaintiff, not a good enough reason, the court will not be accepted. To sum up, the defendant made the East Lao will word (2005) No. 341st "the decision of reeducation through labor", finds that the facts are clear, the evidence is sufficient, the applicable law is correct, in accordance with legal procedures, in accordance with the law shall be maintained. Fifth the decision to revoke the defendant in the plaintiff's request, inadequate justifications, the court shall not support. In accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article fifty-fourth (a) the provisions of item, decision: to maintain the defendant Dongguan City East labor reeducation through labor management committee will word (2005) No. 341st "the decision of reeducation through labor" in the fifth book. The 100 yuan of case acceptance fee shall be borne by the plaintiff Zhang Guojian.

The appellant Zhang Guojian refuses to accept the judgment, Appeal said: first, the first instance court ascertained that the facts are not clear. The afternoon of June 10, 2005, the appellant and his brother-in-law Heqing two to Dongguan City, Dalang mayor Fu Road Pedestrian Street in order to shopping, do not know beforehand with the people in the mob. The people who think that they did not participate in the. A trial 1, be submitted to the court of appeal in Dongguan City Labor Education Management Committee of evidence, the report materials only witness Zhong Yaogen in appeal people accused of trouble place, but Zhong Yaogen's statements are not directly, clearly against the appellant have participated in the riot act. The other witnesses were not in the appellant alleged trouble place, can not be identified as the appellant in trouble for. 2 riot scene photograph is shown in a scene. The only one there is the photo shows only the appellant is in a ruined motorcycle side, but also look like sideways. The Appellant was out of curiosity, instinctively go to trouble spot. Take the above people in trouble near the scene, as the judge appeals people are involved in the rioting basis apparently hasty. 3 the court of first instance the appeal failed to give evidence to the contrary but no certification according to the 5 riot scene photos (not reflect the appellant in trouble behavior), 8.DVD (evidence a significant cut marks) the authenticity of the grounds, direct confirmation form and source of these two pieces of evidence combination method, unconvincing. Two, the appellant Dongguan City reeducation through Labor Committee to make the decision of reeducation through labor program illegal, it shall be revoked. 1 the Trial Measures "reeducation through labor" is published by the State Council on 1982, after 20 years, has become increasingly apparent abuses. Although the law can be used as a management committee of reeducation through labor processing basis, but the authorities should be handled in order to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the staff for the concept of advancing with the times to address new problems. 2 combined with the "administrative punishment law" and "the relevant provisions of the public security organ shall handle the procedure of administrative cases", the appellee before of the appellant for reeducation through labor decision, should perform necessary duty. 3 in this case, the appellee in the absence of sufficient evidence, neither consider the usual performance is not the behavior of the whole event analysis in nature, a decision of zero nine months a year on its, belonging to the breach of privilege. The request for revocation of the original judgment: 1; 2 revocation East Lao (2005) No. 341st "the decision of reeducation through labor" fifth decisions; 3 by the appellant a second trial, legal fees.

The appellant Dongguan City reeducation through labor committee did not reply in defense during the second instance.

After review, the trial court trial testimony and evidence of legitimate and effective, can prove the facts, the court for confirmation.

This house believes that, according to the "Interim Provisions" reeducation through labor to article fourth, article eleventh, the appellant Dongguan City reeducation through Labor Committee as the management work of reeducation through labor administrative departments in accordance with the law, have the right to exercise the functions and powers to make the decision of reeducation through labor. According to the respondent to provide the appellant Zhang Guojian my confession materials, records of defiance and affray process of DVD video, photos, and live the events related to the exploration site photos, record, orientation map evidence enough to prove that the appellant, at noon of June 10, 2005, in Dongguan City, Dalang mayor Fu Road pedestrian street in the affray facts. The appellee according to the relevant provisions of "Trial Measures" reeducation through labor, the appeal made by East Lao word (2005) No. 341st "the decision of reeducation through labor" fifth decision of reeducation through labor, the genus, finds that the facts are clear, the evidence is sufficient, the applicable law is correct, should be supported. The appellant filed an appeal, the appellee made the decision of reeducation through labor is insufficient evidence, illegal procedure, the trial court improperly. But according to the respondent to provide the scene DVD video, photos and original evidence of the check, and between the scene investigation transcripts, photo, range map evidence corroborate each other, the appellant is involved in the trouble has proved. The appellant claims the lack of factual and legal basis, the court shall not support. The judgement of the lower court to maintain the Dongguan Management Committee of reeducation through labor East Lao will word (2005) No. 341st "the decision of reeducation through labor" in the fifth correct, in accordance with the law shall be maintained. In accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article sixty-first (a) of the Convention, the decision as follows:

Dismiss the appeal, upheld the.

The second instance procedure fee 100 yuan by the appellant Zhang Guojian bear.

This judgment is the final judgment.

Chief justice Xie Shaoqing

Judge Yang Xiaoyun

Acting judge Zhou Gang

Two hundred six years in June 5th

The clerk Wang Lulu

Reeducation through labor, Xu Songyan v. Foshan Shunde reeducation through labor management committee decided a case

Guangdong Province -- Foshan City Intermediate People's Court (2004-7-12)

 

Guangdong Province Foshan City Intermediate People's court

Administrative judgment

(2004) the Buddha France to end the word no. sixty-first

The appellant (the plaintiff): Xu Songyan, female, the Han nationality, born in July 21, 1954, lived in (omitted).

Attorney: swim from this, male, Han nationality, born in January 3, 1949, lived in (omitted).

Appellee (defendant in the original instance): Shunde District, Foshan reeducation through labor management committee. Address: Shunde District Daliang Street office Demin Lu Foshan city.

Legal representative: Jiang Zuozhong, director.

Attorney: Weng Foshan arts, deputy chief of the Shunde District Public Security Bureau legal department.

Agent: Wang Jingfei, Foshan city Shunde District Public Security Bureau legal department clerk.

The appellant Xu Songyan for Shunde District v. Foshan reeducation through Labor Management Committee decision of reeducation through labor case, not Foshan city Shunde District People's Court (2004) smoothing method for early word no. twenty-sixth administrative decision, appeal to the court. This court formed a collegiate bench, the case was heard, has now been finalized.

The thought: according to the provisions of relevant laws, administrative organs in the specific administrative acts, shall refer to the legal basis for the specific, but this case is Shunde area the appellant Foshan reeducation through labor management committee to shun Lao Shen Zi [2003] No. 470th "the decision of reeducation through labor", cited only qualitative terms, without reference penalties, re education through labor six months a year. So, the appellee made the "decision of reeducation through labor law book" error. The appellee argued that it made the "decision of reeducation through labor law book" the right reason not established, shall not be admissible. The appellee on March 23, 2004 during the first trial to trial from the word [2004] Shun work No. second "to revoke the decision of reeducation through labor", decided to withdraw the Shun work trial word [2003] No. 470th "the decision of reeducation through labor", and make a smooth work trial word [2004] No. second "the decision of reeducation through labor" re on the same day, and on the appellant Xu Songyan, the respondent has withdrawn its made Shun work trial word [2003] No. 470th "the decision of reeducation through labor", therefore, the appellee to shun Lao Shen Zi [2003] No. 470th "the decision of reeducation through labor" of the appellant has no legal effect. The appellee's Shun Lao Shen Zi [2003] No. 470th "the decision of reeducation through labor" illegal, but because of the "decision of reeducation through labor" has been revoked, does not have the legal effect of the appellant, does not damage the legitimate rights and interests of people so, on appeal, the appellant to restore their personal freedom claim should not be supported. In accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article fifty-fourth (two) of second Mu and the Supreme People's court "on the implementation of 'the third paragraph of the administrative litigation law of the people's Republic of China' interpretation of the" fiftieth and the Supreme People's court "about the trial of administrative compensation regulations" issues of compensation cases, the provisions of article thirty-third decision: in August 29, 2003, confirmed to be the Shunde District Foshan reeducation through labor management committee of the CIS labor trial word [2003] No. 470th "the decision of reeducation through labor" illegal; appeal dismissed Xu Songyan's other claims. Litigation fee of RMB 100 yuan by the appellant.

The appellant Xu Songyan refuses to accept the judgment, Appeal said: the trial court trial procedure unfair, biased by administrative appellant Foshan city Shunde District Management Committee of reeducation through labor law; the appellee to reeducation through labor punishment of illegal, not only is not based on facts, and erroneous application of the law or regulations, the illegal procedure. Therefore, requested the court of second instance court for revocation of the original judgment, to ascertain the facts, long trial; confirm the appellee's reeducation through labor administrative coercive measures illegal; compensation for the shop closed, default and recurrent expenditure 6954.83 yuan; pay the appellant mental solatium 10000 yuan; decree by appeal appellant to eliminate the influence of man-made, restore the reputation of confirmation; the appellee administrative omission infringement of personal freedom of the people; the compensation calculated in accordance with the "State Compensation Law" article twenty-sixth.

Shunde District, the appellant Foshan reeducation through labor management committee said in reply: to the appellant Xu Songyan Shun Lao Shen Zi [2003] No. 470th "the decision of reeducation through labor" facts are clear, the evidence, legal procedures. In addition, because the legal basis I will be referred to in making decision of reeducation through labor of the appellant Xu Songyan is not comprehensive enough, I will in March 23, 2004 dropped the word Shun work [2003] No. 470th "the decision of reeducation through labor", and make a smooth work trial words [2004]00002 "the decision of reeducation through labor" re on the same day, and served on appeal people and their families. "The facts and grounds" no factual and legal basis for the appeal claimed, the court shall not accept. Please the court of second instance shall be upheld, and rejected the appellant's other claims.

After review, the trial court trial testimony and evidence of legitimate and effective, can prove the facts, the court for confirmation.

This house believes that: according to the "Interim Provisions" reeducation through labor to fourth, by the Shunde District, the appellant Foshan reeducation through labor management committee shall have the authority to make the decision of reeducation through labor. In this case, by the Shunde District, the appellant Foshan reeducation through labor management committee to shun Lao Shen Zi [2003] No. 470th "the decision of reeducation through labor", cited only qualitative terms, without reference to the penalty clause re education through labor six months a year. According to the provisions of relevant laws, administrative organs in the specific administrative acts, shall refer to the legal basis for the specific, so the appellee made the "decision of reeducation through labor law book" error. The appellee on March 23, 2004 during the first trial to trial from the word [2004] Shun work No. second "to revoke the decision of reeducation through labor", decided to withdraw the Shun work trial word [2003] No. 470th "the decision of reeducation through labor", and make a smooth work trial word [2004] No. second "the decision of reeducation through labor" re on the same day, and on the appellant Xu Songyan. According to the provisions of the Supreme People's court "on the implementation of 'issues' Administrative Procedure Law of the people's Republic of China" fiftieth the interpretation of section third, the Court confirmed that the appellant Shunde District Foshan reeducation through labor management committee in August 29, 2003 to shun Lao Shen Zi [2003] No. 470th "the decision of reeducation through labor" illegal sentences correctly according to law, shall be maintained. The appellee has withdrawn its made Shun work trial word [2003] No. 470th "the decision of reeducation through labor", and a new specific administrative behavior, therefore, the appellant's compensation claim, should be resolved by the specific administrative act of the redo the procedure. The trial court dismissed the appellant's other claims the right, in accordance with the law shall be maintained. The appellant fails, the court shall not support. To sum up, in accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article sixty-first (a) of the Convention, the decision as follows:

Dismiss the appeal, upheld the.

The second instance procedure fee 100 yuan by the appellant.

This judgment is the final judgment.

Chief justice Xie Shaoqing

Judge Yang Xiaoyun

Acting judge Wu Wenzhi

 

Two hundred four years in July 12th

This piece with the original check is

The clerk Xu Yunxian

Zhou Wenzhong v. Foshan reeducation through labor management committee administrative punishment case

Guangdong Province -- Foshan City Intermediate People's Court (2003-11-18)

 

Guangdong Province Foshan City Intermediate People's court

Administrative judgment

(2003) the Buddha France to end the word no. forty-fifth

The appellant (the plaintiff): Zhou Wenzhong, male, the Han nationality, born in March 29, 1962, lived in Wan GUI Xiang Xi Wan Shou Cun, Nanhai District Jiujiang town Foshan City, No. 33.

Appellee (defendant in the original instance): Foshan reeducation through labor management committee. Address: No. 8, Foshan Daifuku road.

Legal representative: Lu Hanchao, director of.

Agent: Xu Jian, Foshan City Public Security Bureau legal department clerk.

Attorney: Transit gold, Foshan City Public Security Bureau legal department clerk.

The appellant Zhou Wenzhong administrative punishment for the v. Foshan reeducation through labor management committee refuses to accept the case, Foshan city Chancheng District People's court made in May 8, 2003 (2003) the city was at the beginning of the word no. third administrative decision, appeal to the court. This court formed a collegiate bench, the case was heard, has now been finalized.

The identification of the fact: the appellee Foshan reeducation through labor management commission found that the appellant Zhou Wenzhong in April 9, 2002 to carry money 8000 yuan, together with Pan Zhenji, A Jian and two Jiujiang men flee to Foshan Jiujiang town Nanhai District Yongding food restaurant Jincheng Real, the first collection of A Jian previously owed money 13000 yuan, a total of 21000 yuan casino gambling, gambling with poker "Five Dragon" and other forms of. On the afternoon of the same day the appellant collection pan's debts 10000 yuan, 73800 yuan and win the pan, pan wrote IOU to the appellant. The next day, the appellant to Ken chase received 5000 yuan, the appellant in April 16, 2002 police officers arrested. The appellee, "the people's Republic of China in accordance with the regulations on administrative penalties for public security" the first paragraph of article thirty-second and "reeducation through labor" provisions of article thirteenth of the trial, the appellant to reeducation through labor two years (2002) RAU Shen Zi No. 807 decision of reeducation through labor. The appellant may, to Foshan Municipal People's government for reconsideration. Foshan Municipal People's Government in January 24, 2003 to make the Buddha's referendum (2002) No. 23: maintain the reconsideration decision Foshan reeducation through labor management committee (2002) RAU Shen Zi No. 807 decision of reeducation through labor.

After that, the case dispute focus is: the appellee Foshan reeducation through labor management committees (2002) No. 807th RAU instance whether the decision of reeducation through labor finds that the facts are clear, punishment is appropriate. The focus of controversy to Shimingben case, will from the respondent to the specific administrative act according to laws and regulations in order to facts, applicable to analyzing correctly. The appellant in April 9, 2002 with the money together with Pan Zhenji, A Jian and others to Foshan city Jiujiang town Nanhai District Yongding food Jia Zhuang Jincheng Real gambling, the gambling charge before before A Jian owed a debt of 13000 yuan, the gambling to win the Pan Zhenji 10000 yuan in cash, port number 73800 yuan, pan wrote IOU to the appellant, and win a A Jian number of 10000 yuan, the next day to receive A Jian 5000 yuan in cash. In April 16, 2002 due to gambling seized by the public security organ, the fact that Pan Zhenji report material, the appellant to accept the public security organs inquire statement notes with each other, and the testimony of the witness, material evidence confirmed, and the appellant identified gambling site scene photos to prove, the appellee that the appellant gambling facts are clear. "The provisions of article thirty-second of the people's Republic of China Public Security Management Punishment Ordinance": "strictly prohibits the following acts: (1) gambling or provide the conditions for gambling;...... The act of 15 days detention, and single or impose a fine of three thousand yuan; or re education through labour according to regulations; constitute a crime, shall be investigated for criminal responsibility according to law." Gambling appeals people clearly in violation of the provisions, the provisions of the amount is huge, if the circumstances are serious. The appellee in accordance with the State Council on Forwarding the Ministry of public security "reeducation through labor" Trial Measures thirteenth "reeducation through labor period, according to the needs of the people of reeducation through labor criminal facts, nature, circumstances, motivation and harm of plot, determined for one to three years. The time of reeducation through labor, calculated from the date of notification, notification received before first sheltering for investigation or detention, specify a day allowance a day ", illegal gambling on the appellant's decision two years of reeducation through labor, the applicable law is correct, punishment is appropriate. From the evidence and the above analysis, the program of specific administrative act by the appellant to legitimate. To sum up, the specific administrative act by the appellant appeals people to make clear in fact finding, legal procedures, applicable law is correct. Therefore, in accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article fifty-fourth (a) of the Convention, the decision upheld by the appellant Foshan reeducation through labor management committee (2002) No. 807 RAU trial decision of reeducation through labor, the case acceptance fee of 100 yuan by the appellant Zhou Wenzhong bear.

The appellant Zhou Wenzhong refuses to accept the judgment, Appeal said: first, the appellant and Pan Zhenji, a district, A Jian and another man eating in Jiujiang town of Yongding in April 9, 2002, Jia Zhuang Jincheng room to "big", then to "Five Dragon" spot out of thousands of winning the pan Zhenji port number in this case is 73800 yuan as Pan Zhenji says, there is no factual basis; two, the Jiujiang Public Security Bureau, said a A Jian and a man on the run, not the truth, in fact they are at home or in a stall, the police captured in April 16, 2002 when I was not on the spot, from my body found the content for the "Pan Zhenji asked me to borrow 73800 yuan" IOU things, the wife of Pan Zhenji Lu Nuanzhen's testimony is not enough to them; three, I am a good citizen, after the incident, the Jiujiang Public Security Bureau didn't listen to my statement on the facts of the situation, but Pan Zhenji listened to the story. The appellee did not find other people come back to ask, and even forged material, by beating means forcing my signature to the document. To sum up, I am Zhou Wenzhong's behavior does not belong to the gambling behavior, in accordance with the law shall not be re education through labor. Court finds that the facts are not clear, erroneous application of the law, request the court of second instance shall be amended according to the law.

The appellee Foshan City Management Committee of reeducation through labor in reply said: one, the facts are clear, irrefutable evidence. Via checking, April 9, 2002 at 12 pm, the appellant Zhou Wenzhong carries 8000 yuan in cash with Pan Moumou (another treatment), area XX (at large), A Jian (at large) and another unidentified man (at large) in Foshan city Jiujiang town Nanhai District Yongding food Jia Zhuang Jincheng room, use cards to "dig the earth", then to "Five Dragon" in the form of gambling. Gambling before the people to a problem previously owed a debt of 13000 yuan, a total of 21000 yuan of money to gamble. Gambling process, due to the appellant the "spot" cheating, win the pan's port number 73800 yuan, "A Jian" number is 10000 yuan. That afternoon, the appellant to recover the pan's gambling debts of 10000 yuan, the morning of April 10th, the appellant to recover the problem gambling debts of 5000 yuan. In April 16th, the appellant again to the pan to recover debts was the police caught red handed. The above facts with evidence, the testimony of witnesses, statements of the parties, transcripts of the scene. Two, the appellant's behavior should be sent to reeducation through labor. (a) the appellant gambling participation in fact no excuses. Gambling on the same day, the appellant is called the waiter for a poker, is proposed. The original "Five" (i.e. five queues "). The people in the first process. "Big" in "spot" cheating, ready for gambling "Five Dragon" won, thus the appellant to participate in gambling is deliberate, premeditated, not its argued "reluctance to participate". But the appellant to pan Moumou for gambling debts by the police arrested on the spot, the appellant to give up gambling debts had no visible means, thus the appellant gambling if the circumstances are serious, shall be sent to reeducation through labor. (two) the Appellant was not a first offender. The appellant confession, the appellant to gambling sites after the first charge "A Jian" had less money 13000 yuan, enough to prove that the Appellant was not the first time gambling. The skilled in gambling, gambling process can be hidden from other people cheat to "spot" approach, a huge amount of gambling, the evidence is sufficient to prove the appellant is not what it called "first", if the circumstances are serious, shall be sent to reeducation through labor. Three, in the case of the procedure of investigation in the process of legal, proper measures, appropriate sentencing. In the process of handling a case handling units to strictly abide by the public security organs shall handle procedures of criminal cases, and supreme v. people called "Gong", "urged". To sum up, this will make the decision of reeducation through labor clear in fact finding, sufficient evidence, the applicable law is correct, proper handling, the appellant request to cancel the decision of reeducation through labor no factual or legal basis, requested the court of second instance rejected the appellant's request in accordance with the law.

Find out the trial, the trial court after hearing testimony and evidence of legitimate and effective, can prove the facts ascertained, this court legally recognised.

This house believes that: according to the "Interim Provisions" reeducation through labor to article fourth, the appellee Foshan reeducation through labor management committee shall have the authority to make the decision of reeducation through labor. In this case, the statements of the parties, the testimony of a witness, the site identified photos, which evidence the appellee provides, can confirm each other, enough to prove that the appellant Zhou Wenzhong gambling facts, and gambling amount is huge, if the circumstances are serious. The appellant to deny its gambling claims, the court shall not support. In addition, a petitioner thinks the appellee forged material by beating means forcing its signature ideas, because there is no evidence to support, so the court shall not accept. In view of the plot of gambling appellant serious fact, appellee "of the people's Republic of China in accordance with the regulations on administrative penalties for public security" the first paragraph of article thirty-second and "reeducation through labor trial regulations" in article thirteenth, decision two years of reeducation through labor to the appellant, correctly applies the law, punishment is appropriate. In addition, the specific administrative act by the appellant to perform the investigation evidence collection, examination, decision, delivery of the statutory procedures, the legality of procedure. In summary, the trial court to maintain the appellee a specific administrative act of the ruling that the facts clearly, correctly applies the law, in accordance with the law shall be maintained. In accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article sixty-first (a) of the Convention, the decision as follows:

Dismiss the appeal, upheld the.

The second instance procedure fee 100 yuan by the appellant.

This judgment is the final judgment.

This piece with the original check is

Chief justice Yu Pintu

Judge Yang Xiaoyun

Acting judge Zhou Gang

Two hundred three years in November 18th

 

The clerk Xu Yunxian

 

What super v. Liuzhou Municipal Commission of reeducation through labor

-- the the Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region intermediate people's Court of Liuzhou city (2002-3-14)

 

The Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region Liuzhou City Intermediate People's court

Administrative judgment

(2002) Liushi to end the word no. seventh

The appellant (the plaintiff) He Chao, male, born 25 June 1973, the Han nationality, Qitaihe City, Heilongjiang, individual. Live (omitted), now the Liuzhou Municipal Public Security Bureau criminal detention the reeducation through labor.

Attorney: He Sanqin, male, born 2 November 1942, the Han nationality, Qitaihe city in Heilongjiang Province, Liuzhou City Huahong pharmaceutical company retired workers, live (omitted), Department of the appellant He Chaozhi father.

Attorney: Liu Zhiteng, male, born 15 June 1954, the Han nationality, the Liujiang River County, the self-employed, live (omitted).

Appellee (defendant in the original instance) Liuzhou City Labor Education Management committee. Address: Liuzhou Friendship Road No. 6.

Legal representative Liang Bing, director of the Liuzhou municipal labor education management committee.

Agent Li Gang, chief of the Department of Public Security Bureau police detachment accident in Liuzhou city.

Agent Wu Lirong, chief of the legal division of Public Security Bureau of suburban branch of Liuzhou.

The appellant He Chao was the appellant Liuzhou City Management Committee of reeducation through labor decision of reeducation through labor case, the Liuzhou city Yufeng District People's Court (2001) fish early word no. eighth administrative decision, appeal to the court. This court formed a collegiate bench trial of the case. Now the trial has been closed.

The original judgment, the plaintiff He Chao has a driver's license, but in a suspended period, many drivers of motor vehicles, according to the Ministry of public security to explain, is driving without a license. Driving without a license for motor vehicle behavior is a violation of traffic regulations act, it is a violation of the "people's Republic of China on administrative penalties for public security" behavior. The defendant Liuzhou City reeducation through labor management committee according to the plaintiff He Chao repeatedly violated the "Regulations on administrative penalties for public security", and repeated facts, in accordance with the "decision" of the State Council Concerning reeducation through labour first (1) the provisions of item, decide the conclusive evidence on the plaintiff He Chao a year of reeducation through labor administrative coercive measures,, correct application of laws and regulations, in compliance with the statutory procedures, shall be maintained. According to the Ministry of public security on the approval of reeducation through labor cases "for my unit or neighborhood organizations do not as approval of reeducation through labor cases to go through procedures" explanation. The plaintiff argues that the defendant decided not to seek their units or the streets of reeducation through labor opinion violation of legal procedure of the opinion, the court shall not accept. In accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article fifty-fourth (a) of the Convention, the decision as follows: to maintain the Liuzhou City Labor Education Management Committee (2001) Liu Jiao Zi No. 652nd decision of reeducation through labor.

He Chao said the verdict of the first trial appeal: the appellant has regular driver's license, but not without a driver's license, the appellant normal operation has been repeatedly administrative punishment. "The first article" decision of the State Council Concerning reeducation through labour (1) provides: "work, a rogue behavior or theft, fraud and other acts not subject to criminal liability, shall violate the administration of public security, incorrigible" to be a re education through labor. This provision does not express the traffic peccancy behavior should implement the provisions for the punishment of reeducation through labor, other relevant laws, regulations and no provisions to reeducation through labor for traffic violations, the appellant Liuzhou City reeducation through labor management committee to expand the interpretation, misuse of authority, make to the appellant's decision of reeducation through labor is wrong, it shall be revoked. Request the second instance court to make a fair decision.

The appellant Liuzhou City Management Committee of reeducation through labor in reply said: the appellant what ultra violate "Regulations" of the people's Republic of China road traffic management article Seventy-eighth (four) and "the people's Republic of China Public Security Management Punishment Ordinance" article twenty-seventh (two) the provisions of item, driving a bus in the violation by the public security traffic police department suspension of driving permit, many continue to drive without a license, the appellee according to the facts mentioned above, in accordance with the "decision" of Article 1 of the State Council Concerning reeducation through labour (1) the provisions of item, a year of reeducation through labor decision is not inappropriate to appeal to He Chao, requested the court of second instance court dismissed the appeal the appellant, maintain the original judgment.

Upon examination and verification, the following evidence can be used as the basis for decision: provided the appellant Liuzhou reeducation through labor management committee: 1, Liuzhou Municipal People's government issued by [2001]41, Liu Liuzhou Municipal People's government office "on the adjustment of Liuzhou City reeducation through labor committee members of the notice"; 2, the Liuzhou Municipal Public Security Bureau police detachment Liunan Brigade (2001) book a decision 010295, 010296 administrative punishment; 3, Liunan District Public Security sub (2001) 160, a written decision on the administrative penalty of a; 4, Liunan District Public Security sub (2001) 2004, a written decision on the administrative penalty of a; 5, the traffic police brigade of Yufeng (2001) 7235, a written decision on the administrative penalty of a; 6 in June 5, 2001, the traffic police to correct the violation report; 7, June 5, 2001 check a record; 8, June 5, 2001 interrogation record a; 9, June 8, 2001 interrogation record a; 10, Liunan traffic police team (2001) a number 288432 in June 5th 11, "the State Council on vouchers; decision on education through labor", "added one copy of the specified"; 12, "road traffic regulations" a; 13, the State Council forwarded the Ministry of public security "reeducation through labor" a trial measures; 14, public security Public double word (1999) 3 article "on the approval of reeducation through labor" a reply; 15, "the people's Republic of China Public Security Management Punishment Ordinance" a.

Based on the above evidence to ascertain, the appellant how super is engaged in the bus operation of the self-employed. In December 29, 2000 11 when make, the appellant He Chao driving GUI B - 70876 bus to the bus station at the intersection door was not in accordance with the provisions of parking, traffic police brigade according to the "Regulations" Nan road traffic management article Seventy-eighth (four) of the Convention, the administrative punishment given its suspension of driving license for two months, suspended time since January 2001, 12 to March 11th. On 12 January 2001 eight forty, the appellant He Chao in the fresh air crossing for driving without a license in B - 70876 large buses, Liunan Traffic Police Brigade according to "Public Security Management Punishment Ordinance" article twenty-seventh (two) of the rules, to a fine of 200 yuan. The same year in January 17 days 9 when, the appellant He Chao suspended driving license, driving the vehicle is still, in Liu Yong Lu and Willow Road intersection was Liunan traffic police brigade to intercept, were sentenced to administrative detention for 15 days. In February 3rd the same year, the appellant He Chao suspended license period, once again driving the vehicle, Liuzhou City Public Security Bureau Nan branch according to the "Regulations of the people's Republic of China Public Security Management Punishment Ordinance" in article twenty-seventh, giving He Chao the administrative detention 15 days of administrative punishment again. The same year in June 3rd 20, the appellant He Chao driving GUI B - 70876 large buses in the city of Yufeng mountain by passing an intersection not according to the provisions of parking, in violation of the "Regulations" road traffic management article Seventy-eighth (four) of the Convention, Liuzhou city traffic police brigade of Yufeng administrative penalties as suspend driver's license two month, suspend driver's license for the time from June 4, 2001 to August 3, 2001. On June 5th morning 11 when, the appellant He Chao suspended driving permit, still driving GUI B - 70876 bus, in the city station route south to North Road to East Road, is on duty police interceptor, the violation of the "people's Republic of China Public Security Management Punishment Ordinance" article twenty-seventh (two) the provisions of item, by the Liuzhou Municipal Public Security Bureau Nan branch impose administrative detention 15 days of administrative punishment. In June 14th the same year, the appellant Liuzhou City reeducation through labor management committee repeatedly violate traffic regulations the appellant He Chao facts, circumstances, according to the "decision" of Article 1 of the State Council Concerning reeducation through labour (1) the provisions of item and the Ministry of public security on "reeducation through labor" and the relevant provisions for approval procedures, make (2001) Liu Jiao Zi No. 652nd "the decision of reeducation through labor", decided to appeal people over a year of reeducation through labor, the period from June 5, 2001 to June 4, 2002, and in 2001 June 15 to the appellant He Chao served on the "written decision of reeducation through labor". He Chao is not satisfied with the decision of reeducation through labor, and bring an administrative lawsuit to the court.

This house believes that the appellant He Chao, although the original motor vehicle driver's license, but because the suspended card driving offences, still many times during the motor vehicle driving license, the traffic, public security management regulations of contempt, the acts of serious violations of the relevant provisions of traffic, public security management, and incorrigible. The appellant Liuzhou City reeducation through labor management committee according to the illegal facts the appellant, in accordance with the "decision" of Article 1 of the State Council Concerning reeducation through labour (1) the provisions of item, decided to appeal people over implementation of a year of reeducation through labor administrative coercive measures irrefutable evidence, correct application of laws and regulations, legal procedures, the hospital be maintained. The appellant appeals said the lines have the regular driver's license, but not without a driver's license, the road is not wrong; "the first article" decision of the State Council Concerning reeducation through labour (1) in the no provisions for the traffic peccancy behavior should be re education through labor, the appellee to the appellant the implementation of coercive measures decision of reeducation through labor is the grounds of appeal wrong, No. eighty-fifth "on the '' regulations of article twenty-sixth and the Ministry of Public Security Traffic Management Bureau [89] bus tube (three) study how to understand the answer" on the "no driver's license" include "driving license is revoked during the personnel" explanation discrepancies, the grounds of appeal is not sufficient, the court shall not support. Other requests the appellant appeals argues, because not the adjustment range, the school had not supported. A judgment ascertaining the facts clearly, correctly applies the law, legal procedures.

To sum up, in accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article sixty-first (a) of the Convention, the decision as follows:

Dismiss the appeal, upheld the.

The second case acceptance fee 50 yuan, other litigation costs 50 yuan, two total 100 yuan, by the appellant He Chao burden.

This judgment is the final judgment.

Chief justice Wu Xiguang

Judge Ding Yuanmei

Judge Fu Guangde

Two 00 two years in March 14th

This piece with the original check is

The clerk Wu Meimei

Zhang Zhongxiao is not because of the reeducation through labor in Daqing City Management Committee of reeducation through labor decision

-- Heilongjiang province Daqing City Intermediate People's Court (2002-3-20)

 

Daqing city in Heilongjiang province in the people's Court level

Administrative judgment

(2002) a line with the word no. Sixth

The appellant (defendant in the original instance) Daqing City Labor Education Management Committee, address: Daqing city Saertu District, East village.

Legal representative: Xiao Fengming, director of.

Attorney: Ren Chuanhong, legal department of Daqing City Public Security Bureau cadres.

Appellee (the plaintiff) Zhang Zhongxiao, male, was born in August 26, 1977, Han nationality, no occupation, live Qixing village of Heilongjiang province Wuchang mayor shan.

Attorney: Feng Youdong, male, born in November 26, 1967, Han nationality, Daqing Honggang District Housing Reform Office cadres, Honggang District, Daqing city residential village center of 7-19 Building 2 unit 302 room.

Third Hu Heping, male, was born in August 21, 1976, Han nationality, no occupation, the white Miao Xiang Luotian County of Hubei province in a row shaped Village 7 groups.

The appellant Zhang Zhongxiao not because of reeducation through labor in Daqing City Management Committee of reeducation through labor decision refuses to accept the case, Daqing city Saertu District People's Court (2001), for at the beginning of the word no. fortieth administrative decision, appeal to the court. This court formed a collegiate bench, in March 11, 2002 held a public hearing of the case. The legal representative of the appellant Daqing reeducation through labor management committee entrusted agent Ren Chuanhong, appellee Zhang Zhongxiao and agent Feng Youdong, Hu Heping third people attended the court proceedings. In this case by the judicial committee for discussion and decision has now been finalized.

The judgment of the first instance found, Zhang Zhongxiao, Hu Heping by others for diploma, certificate of employment post advertisement conduct did not constitute a forgery behavior, Zhang Zhongxiao, Hu Heping does not belong to the legal provisions of the object of reeducation through labor, Daqing City Labor Education Management Committee made the Qing Lao word article (2001) No. 98-199 decision of reeducation through labor insufficient evidence, in accordance with the verdict: revocation Daqing City Management Committee of reeducation through labor in July 12, 2001 made the Qing Lao word (2001) No. 98-199 decision of reeducation through labor. The defendant Daqing City reeducation through labor management committee against the original appeal said: Zhang Zhongxiao, Hu Heping's behavior is the minor crime, not a criminal punishment of criminal acts, Zhang Zhongxiao, Hu Heping, the employer is a common crime, just their own in this case in the division of labor is not the same, Zhang Zhongxiao was hired to do not affect the composition of forged documents. Request the court of second instance to rescind the original judgment, the judgment shall be amended according to. The plaintiff Zhang Zhongxiao in reply said: the people employed in the post advertising law, do not constitute a forgery. The State Council "reeducation through labor trial object cited by the way" does not include posting illegal advertising staff, not including the suspected forgery seal personnel, for the application of the State Council (80) No. 56 document the first item belongs to the erroneous application of the law, the decision is correct, the request of the second instance shall maintain.

Through investigation, on June 14, 2001, Zhang Zhongxiao, Hu Heping is Daqing City Public Security Bureau Saertu branch of criminal detention on suspicion of false documents, in 2001 July 4 reeducation through labor, Daqing City Labor Education Management Committee in July 12, 2001 made the Qing Lao word (2001) No. 198-199 decision of reeducation through labor, since 2001 May that, Hu peace posted in Daqing for 198 fake diploma advertising more than 5000 people, have 1400 yuan, Zhang Zhongxiao posted more than 2000, to $850, in its place and seized 198 ad 1000. According to the State Council (1980) the provisions of item No. 56 file first, decide on the Hu peace three years of reeducation through labor, the Zhang Zhongxiao two years of reeducation through labor. The decision in 2001 July 12 day served with Zhang Zhongxiao, Zhang Zhongxiao refuses to accept, apply for reconsideration to the people's Government of Daqing City, Daqing City People's Government in September 18, 2001 to make a reconsideration decision, maintain the detention decision, Zhang Zhongxiao still refuses to accept, to the court.

The opinion of this court, Zhang Zhongxiao, Hu Heping posted by others for fake diplomas, certificates of employment advertising behavior multiple times in multiple places, is a suspected of forgery crime, the behavior of social harmfulness is great, belongs to the State Council (1980) range of No. 56 document the first regulations shall be of reeducation through labor. Daqing City reeducation through labor management committees (2001) Qing Law No. 198-199 of the word decision of reeducation through labor is not inappropriate, should decide to maintain. Therefore, the original judgment as to the facts of the case and the erroneous application of the law, it shall be revoked, the appellant shall be established, support. According to "the administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" sixty-first third, the decision as follows:

One, the revocation of Daqing city Saertu District People's Court (2001), for at the beginning of the word no. fortieth administrative judgment;

Two, to maintain the Daqing City Management Committee of reeducation through labor in July 12, 2001 made the Qing Lao word (2001) No. 198-199 decision of reeducation through labor.

A second trial, the case acceptance fee of 200 yuan, the appellant Zhang Zhongxiao burden.

This judgment is the final judgment.

Chief justice Liang Xiaojun

Acting judge Cai Libin

Acting judge Xie Lixin

March 20, 2002

The clerk Yang He

The people's government Foshan Zhang Qiwei v. Board of reeducation through labor decision of reeducation through labor

Guangdong Province -- Foshan City Intermediate People's Court (2003-3-12)

 

Guangdong Province Foshan City Intermediate People's court

Administrative judgment

(2002) the Buddha France to end the word no. forty-sixth

The appellant (the plaintiff): Zhang Qiwei, male, the Han nationality, born in June 11, 1979, lived in Sichuan Province Langzhong City Hu Shan Xiang Hu Ridge Village 1 groups.

Attorney: Zhang Qirong, male, the Han nationality, born in December 2, 1969, lived in Sichuan Province Langzhong City Liangshui Xiang Lingquan Temple Village 9 groups.

Appellee (defendant in the original instance): Foshan reeducation through labor management committee of the Municipal People's government. Address: No. 8, Foshan Daifuku road.

Legal representative: Lu Hanchao, director of.

Agent: Zhuang Yuerong, Foshan City Public Security Bureau cadres.

Attorney: Transit gold, Foshan City Public Security Bureau cadres.

The plaintiff Zhang Qiwei by the people's government Foshan v. the reeducation through Labor Management Committee decision of reeducation through labor is a case, the people's court Foshan city (2002) Buddha city at the beginning of the word no. fourth for administrative decision, appeal to the court. This court formed a collegiate bench, the case was heard, has now been finalized.

The fact that the trial court through cross examination, authentication and identification: the people's Government of the Foshan City reeducation through labor management committee according to the plaintiff Zhang Qiwei on the afternoon of February 28, 2002, one to the South China Sea city, Jiujiang Jun Yue Hotel room 407, a room to sleep on the machine, a mobile phone stolen the victim Liu value 540 yuan (mobile phone), was inside the room once someone found in fleeing the scene, for the destruction of evidence, the illegal facts will loot abandoned in Jiujiang Bay Village, in accordance with the "notice" of the State Council on forced labour and housing review two measures are unified in the reeducation through labor first and "reeducation through labor" provisions of article thirteenth of the trial, the plaintiff Zhang Qiwei made a decision of reeducation through labor years of. The plaintiff refuses to accept, bring a lawsuit to the court, requesting revocation of the defendant's (2002) RAU Shen Zi No. 400 decision of reeducation through labor.

The trial court held that: the administrative litigation is to review the legality of concrete administrative action to the people's court proceedings of administrative subject. The defendant the plaintiff identified to the South China Sea city, Jiujiang Jun Yue Hotel room 407 on the afternoon of February 28, 2002, by real people inside the machine bed, a mobile phone stolen the victim Liu the value of 540 yuan, is the room was so found in fleeing the scene, for the destruction of evidence, the illegal facts loot abandoned in Jiujiang bay village has stolen the statement, the statement and the testimony of witnesses confirmed; the plaintiff to destroy the evidence put the mobile phone into the river so that cannot be salvaged, the plaintiff bona waviata location identification record and the destruction of evidence statement confirmed. In summary, the stolen mobile phone the illegal facts are clear, indeed, sufficient evidence. The minor violations is illegal and criminal acts are not serious enough for criminal punishment, which belongs to the need for forced labor. According to the "notice" the State Council on forced labour and housing review two measures are unified in the reeducation through labor first and "reeducation through labor" provisions of article thirteenth of the trial, the plaintiff decided on a year of reeducation through labor, according to law, legal procedures. Therefore, in accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article fifty-fourth (a) the provisions of item decision: to maintain the defendant's (2002) decision No. 400 RAU instance of reeducation through labor. The case acceptance fee of 100 yuan from the plaintiff.

The appellant Zhang Qiwei refuses to accept the trial court, Appeal said: the fact that is not clear: 1, the appellant submitted four copies of records of investigation, indictment, certificate and other materials to prove that the appellant did not steal mobile phones, not some of the time. 2, the owner of the reporting materials and witness testimony is not true. Because the owner and the witness in the same room, home are in the same place, and are the Jun Yue Hotel Cara OK the University of Miss, so do not rule out the owner and the common false reporting. The witness identification record also can not prove that the appellant is people stealing mobile phone, because the incident on the same day afternoon 4 when, the appellant's wife called the back to the hotel to explain to escort miss when the two sides argue quarrel for a moment, the owner of the witnesses Ceng Meiyun in the interrogation record had talked about before the Spring Festival and the hotel Cara OK the bartender Yahui to play them houses, so the witness can recognize the appellant is normal in 10 different photos, simply can not prove that the Appellant had stolen mobile phone. 3, on-the-spot examination transcripts can not prove that the Appellant had stolen mobile phone behavior. Because the records of inspection only on 407 real layout took pictures, and no other clues that had been stolen. 4, the stolen mobile phone has not appeared, and the public security organs said the appellant to destroy the evidence and threw the mobile phone into the Jiujiang Bay Village, not fishing, this is not the case. 5, the appellant identification is cheating, at the time of the investigators to intimidate, threaten to discard dirty place, and even take very covert means of torture to extract confessions. 6, the respondent submitted by interrogation record is the appellee himself most probably it did not actually happen to write, and then by threats, fraud, punishment means of forcing the appellant to write "the truth" and signed. Revocation of the original judgment, the judgment shall be amended according to this request the court of second instance; this litigation costs borne by the appellee.

The appellee Foshan City Management Committee of reeducation through labor in reply said: 1, the facts are clear, irrefutable evidence. The appellant to theft victim Liu music brand GD92 type mobile phone confessed to the facts, have main statement, witness testimony, valuation evidence, identifying material, the scene material evidence, is sufficient to recognize. 2, the person "this will make the detention decision refers to the facts do not conform to the actual site, is East police station and 407 real escort miss a deception and false." But from all the confession material the appellant has its own view, writing "the above records and I said as" and other words and signature, Na fingerprint, the appellant the reason not established. Dismiss the appeal people to request the second appeal, support our law enforcement.

The appellant and appellee provided no new evidence in the second period, according to the evidence material during the first trial, the Appellant was provided by the appellant, the trial court that trial fact basically clear, the second after a review to be found.

This house believes that, according to the "Interim Provisions" reeducation through labor to article fourth, appellees are responsible for the examination, approval asylum reeducation through labor personnel responsibilities. The appellee that the Appellant had stolen mobile phone, after examination, the appellant is detained by public security organs during that time, the crime attire, the theft, theft mobile phone features to identify the location of the mobile phone, identified the stolen mobile phone into the stream position, these facts and the owner of the reporting materials and the testimony of witnesses corroborated, sufficient to determine the mobile phone owner is the appellant theft. Unable to provide the stolen goods, theft of appellant has been found and deliberate destruction of evidence, evade legal responsibility, but the booty can not come back is not equal to the appellant no theft. The appellant appeals that during his detention in the public security organs, deception, intimidation, threats to security personnel and torture to extract confessions means lack of evidence, shall not be recognized. The investigation for the appellant agent witness testimony, after a trial court and the second review, survey by the testimony of witness is the appellant relatives, fellow witness, time and the time and the investigation is too long, the testimony of doubtful authenticity, not admissible. The court finds that the facts are clear, correctly applies the law, legal procedures, should be maintained, in accordance with the "administrative procedure law of the people's Republic of China" article sixty-first (a) of the Convention, the decision as follows:

Dismiss the appeal, upheld the.

The second instance procedure fee 100 yuan by the appellant.

This judgment is the final judgment.

Chief justice Yu Pintu

A judge Mai Jun Xing

The trialSentencedYang Xiaoyun

Two hundred three years in March 12th

Book clerk Xu Yun Xian