Dehe Case | A Comprehensive Breakthrough from 1.1 Million Charges to Non-Prosecution

Preface

Chen Shilei, a senior partner of DHHT Law Firm's Shanghai office, and Mark Ting, a lawyer at the Shanghai office, handled a case involving alleged fraud by a lawyer. After a thorough defense, they managed to secure an acquittal for the client during the review and prosecution stage, achieving a complete reversal of the case.

01

Case Overview

This case spanned a period of five years. In 2020, Party C, while handling the defense of a case involving the forgery of value-added tax invoices, received 1.1 million yuan in cash for assisting the client in handling the tax refund procedures. In January 2025, relevant personnel reported this incident, claiming that C had committed fraud under the guise of refunding taxes. In February of the same year, the public security authorities initiated an investigation, and in August, the case was transferred to the procuratorial authorities for review and prosecution on suspicion of fraud. Faced with seemingly complete criminal charges, the defense team formulated a multi-dimensional defense plan, ultimately leading the procuratorial authorities to make a decision not to prosecute.

02

Core defense strategy

(1) Dissecting the Legal Elements of the Fraud Crime

The establishment of the crime of fraud requires that the perpetrator fabricates facts, the victim mistakenly believes and delivers the property, and the perpetrator has the intention to illegally possess the property. First, in this case, the payer was clear about the purpose of the payment from the beginning to the end, and the payment was made voluntarily, not due to being misled by fabricated facts and having a mistaken perception. The core causal relationship of the crime of fraud does not exist. Secondly, there were objective reasons for the failure to complete the tax refund, the subsequent entrusted relationship was terminated for some reason, and C also voluntarily returned part of the money. The remaining money was not disposed of and was in accordance with the instructions of relevant personnel, which is sufficient to prove that the perpetrator had no subjective intention to illegally possess the money.

(2) Reviewing the flaws in the witnesses' testimonies

In this case, the statements of several key witnesses were inconsistent with each other, and there were obvious discrepancies in the content. The stability of their testimonies was seriously lacking. At the same time, the core witness in this case had multiple conflicts of interest with Party C and there were disputes between the two parties. The objective authenticity of this witness's testimony could not be guaranteed and thus could not be used as the basis for a verdict.

(3) Evaluating the Validity of Electronic Evidence

The WeChat chat records submitted by the prosecution were used as crucial evidence for the charges. After verification, it was found that the content contained deletions and breaks, the conversation was incomplete and the logic was not coherent, making it impossible to restore the complete facts. According to relevant regulations of criminal proceedings, electronic data with traces of deletion and modification and that affect the authenticity cannot be used as conclusive evidence. This piece of evidence was ultimately excluded in accordance with the law.

(4) Reviewing the legality of the investigation procedures

The defense team's investigation revealed that there were multiple procedural issues during the handling of the case. There was evidence suggesting that the relevant witnesses might have colluded in their testimony. Additionally, some procedures such as questioning, item identification, and the custody and storage of property also had incomplete formalities and non-standard procedures, further weakening the validity of the prosecution's evidence.

03

Case outcome

Taking into account all the facts of the case, the legal basis, and the various opinions put forward by the defense side, after a comprehensive review by the procuratorial authorities, it was determined that the current evidence was insufficient to prove that C某 committed the crime of fraud. Therefore， a non-prosecution decision was made for him in accordance with the law， effectively safeguarding the legitimate rights and professional reputation of the party involved.

04

Practical Insights from Cases

This case, which lasted for five years, fully demonstrates that the review and prosecution stage is a crucial window period for criminal defense, and it also summarizes the four practical directions for effective criminal defense:

Precisely dissecting the elements constituting the crime:

One cannot simply conclude that an act constitutes a crime based on the statement "received money but failed to perform the task". Instead, it is necessary to strictly adhere to the legal requirements of the specific crime, thoroughly examine the factual logic, and break the chain of criminal determination.

Systematically conduct evidence cross-examination:

Not limited to the review of a single piece of evidence, comprehensive verification of all verbal evidence and documentary evidence is conducted, the loopholes and contradictions in the evidence are sorted out, and the prosecution's evidence system is dismantled.

Professional review of electronic data:

Nowadays, electronic data such as chat records have become common evidence. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct professional and rigorous verification from aspects like completeness and continuity, and make good use of the evidence exclusion rules.

Attach importance to the value of procedural defense:

Actively review the legality of the investigation activities, put forward defense opinions regarding procedural flaws, and achieve the combination of substantive defense and procedural defense.

05

Conclusion

In criminal litigation, the review and prosecution stage is an important phase for preventing improper prosecution and resolving criminal risks. The successful handling of this case relied on the defense lawyer's solid legal knowledge, meticulous case analysis, and diversified defense strategies. By adhering to the parallel approach of legal analysis, evidence examination, and procedural review, it is possible to maximize the protection of the client's rights and interests and achieve a fair and just judicial outcome.