The man has only 30 yuan left in the bank for 19 million years.

Home > Finance

The man has only 30 yuan left in the bank for 19 million years.

2018-12-03 00:25:36 147 ℃

In 2010, Mr. Hu, who is doing business overseas, opened a bank account in the name of his wife, Ms. Ye, and deposited more than 19 million yuan. Ye Guoqiang, manager of the personal finance department, managed financial management. Since then, Ye Guoqiang has transferred all the money to fill his financial loopholes.

In 2016, after Ye Guoqiang was sentenced for fraud, Ms. Ye sued the bank, saying that in the absence of her presence, Ye Guoqiang’s forgery of the signature to transfer money was illegal, and pointed out that “password transaction is regarded as my own. "The bank format clause violates its rights and interests. In August 2018, the second trial of the court dismissed Ms. Ye’s request for prosecution. At present, the Zhejiang Higher People’s Court has officially reopened the case.

19 million was transferred to only 30 yuan

In 2010, Mr. Hu, who was doing business overseas, was in the name of his wife, Ms. Ye, in agriculture. Bank Qingtian County Branch of Zhejiang Province deposited 19 million yuan and entrusted the money to Ye Guoqiang, the manager of the bank's personal finance department.

At the end of 2014, Mr. Hu was prepared to take out the money for investment in other projects. Ye Guoqiang replied at the time that the total amount of investment at that time had reached more than 30 million, but the deadline has not yet arrived. Take the money out again. In mid-2015, Mr. Hu repeatedly urged to withdraw money. Ye Guoqiang lost his connection. Mr. Hu went to the bank to inquire about the account and found that 19 million yuan was transferred out several times, and the account balance was only 30 yuan.

In May 2016, Ye Guoqiang was sentenced to 15 years in prison for fraud. The court found that the criminal facts were: From May 2010 to June 2011, Ye Guoqiang put Mr. Hu into Ms. Ye’s account for more than 19 million yuan for gold spot, stock, futures trading and personal capital turnover. In addition, Ye Guoqiang also helped his classmate Chen to allocate funds to others, and was able to charge 1.2% of the monthly interest rate, enticing Chen to open an account, and depositing RMB 2 million to hand over the bank card and password to Ye Guoqiang. Hou Ye Guoqiang used the money for stock trading, returning personal debt, and paying other people's interest of 336,000 yuan.

The court found that the password transaction was deemed to be the same as the first instance

Ms. Ye then appealed the Agricultural Bank Qingtian Branch to the court. The prosecution claimed that he never handed over his ID card or passport to Ye Guoqiang, and never authorized Ye Guoqiang to transfer money or withdraw cash. He never went to the bank to handle the above business. Qingtian Branch illegally handles account opening, transfer and cash withdrawal, causing himself The huge deposits were defrauded and therefore should be held responsible.

On December 18, 2017, the Qingtian County Court of Zhejiang Province decided in the first instance that according to the facts ascertained by the Lishui People’s Court’s criminal judgment, combined with the evidence in the case, it can be confirmed that Ms. Ye agreed and recognized her husband. In his name, he opened an account and agreed to the husband to share the funds with Ye Guoqiang for financial management. It was thus determined that Ms. Ye had formed a principal-agent relationship with her husband. Ms. Ye agreed that her husband handed over the bank card and password to Ye Guoqiang, entrusted Ye Guoqiang to manage the finances, and formed a re-agent relationship between Ye Guoqiang and Ms. Ye.

In view of the principal-agent relationship between Ms. Ye and Ye Guoqiang, the court finally concluded that Ye Guoqiang’s act of holding Ms. Ye’s debit card transfer and cash withdrawal belongs to Ye Guoqiang’s act of acting as a proxy. The result should be regarded as The woman’s own transaction does not belong to the case where the money is fraudulent or stolen. The Qingtian Branch did not constitute a breach of contract when performing the contractual obligations.

The court dismissed Ms. Ye’s lawsuit in the first instance. Ms. Ye appealed to the Lishui City Intermediate People's Court.

Zhejiang High Court's re-receipt of the re-inspection of the re-inspection

The court of second instance found the bank illegal operation

In August 2018, the Lishui City Intermediate People's Court issued a second-instance judgment. Although the court still ruled that Ms. Ye lost the case, she did not use the bank's stipulations in the judgment as the basis for the judgment.

The second trial of the court held that the deposit contracts of both parties were true and valid. The available evidence shows that Ms. Ye and Mr. Hu and Ye Guoqiang formed an entrusted financial relationship. Although Ye Guoqiang was working in the Qingtian Sub-branch of the Agricultural Bank of China, his entrusted financial relationship with Mr. Hu did not represent the unit and was not a duty, and Ms. Ye. There was no financial product contract with the bank, and no de facto financial management behavior occurred. Ms. Ye and the bank did not have a legal relationship with entrusted financial management.

In this case, the bank has improper operations in the business of opening an account for Ms. Ye, but the account opening itself is the real voluntary behavior of Ms. Ye, so it does not affect the validity of the deposit contract. Although the bank has violated the rules of operation in the counter transfer business, and the self-service transfer is illegal or not, it is the true meaning of Ms. Ye. The transfer and withdrawal service of the bank is only the way for Ye Guoqiang to use the funds. Ms. Ye’s loss is due to Ye Guoqiang’s purchase of high-risk stock futures. There is no causal relationship between the bank’s illegal operation and Ms. Ye’s losses.

The court accordingly dismissed Ms. Ye’s lawsuit and upheld the original verdict. Ms. Ye immediately filed a complaint with the Zhejiang Higher People's Court. On November 23, the Zhejiang Higher People's Court officially filed a case for retrial.

Zhejiang High Court's Reconsideration Acceptance Notice