When the female property surveyor of the Housing Department was accused of applying for housing allowance, her husband who worked in a private organization was also given a similar allowance.
As a result, the female surveyor received more than 4.88 million yuan in housing allowance in 17 years.
The surveyor and her husband were convicted of fraud and sentenced to 22 and 25 months in prison respectively.
The two appealed earlier, and the Court of Appeal issued a ruling today (19th), stating that in today's society, the husband and wife may not be open to each other in terms of finances, and the surveyor may not know that the husband is receiving the housing allowance. It ruled that the surveyor’s appeal was straightforward, but it was rejected His husband’s appeal.
The two appellants were Huang Shuzhen and Lu Dongcai, respectively, the property surveyor of the Housing Department and the manager of Wing On Computer Systems Co., Ltd. at the time of the case.
Huang’s earlier statement stated that the trial judge was only due to the fact that the two appellants had been married for a long time. He concluded that Huang must know that Lu received housing allowance because of lack of foundation.
A good relationship between husband and wife may not be open to each other’s finances
In its ruling, the Court of Appeal pointed out that in today's society, no matter how good the relationship between husband and wife is, the financial aspects may not be open to each other.
In this case, Lu knew that civil servants could not enjoy dual benefits, but wanted to increase family income. Therefore, he might not have truthfully disclosed the nature of this income to Huang. The trial judge did not explain why this possibility was ruled out, so he ruled that Huang's appeal was straightforward.
Lu knows the purpose of double welfare
Regarding Lu Dongcai’s appeal, the dishonesty referred to in the Court of Appeal’s charges refers to the fact that Lu stated in the statement that he was Huang’s husband when involved in the case and did not receive any subsidies or cash allowances from his employer for the purchase of a property or renting a residence. , He knew he did not meet the conditions for making a statement.
The Court of Appeal pointed out that non-compliance means that the allowance constitutes a double welfare defined by the government.
As long as Lu knew that the subsidy involved in the case was regarded as a double benefit by the government, his statement would be dishonest.
The Court of Appeal held that there was sufficient evidence in the case, stating that Lu knew the government's definition of dual welfare, and therefore rejected his appeal.
Case Number: CACC14/2020
The government female surveyor and her husband defraud Fangjin in 17 years, the official reprimanded that they were so greedy that they were unable to extricate themselves from prison 22 and 25. The government female surveyor and her husband defrauded Fangjin by 4.88 million and both were convicted and lost about 6.4 million pensions. Superintendent Long Shaoquanshe False claims that homeowners were granted loans of approximately 6 million for their parents to live in. 2 were convicted of fraud and convicted of fraud, Superintendent Chen Kaigang and his girlfriend were arrested for conspiracy to defraud and will be suspended this morning.
01News