Source: Procuratorate Daily Zhang Renping Deng Liehui
Teacher Wu, who teaches in Putian City, Fujian Province, can't think of how she would encounter a “flying debt” of more than 1.2 million yuan, and she still owes a private car loan during the period of the husband-wife relationship.
"I didn't know about this arrears, and I didn't participate in the court trial. Why did the judgment let me pay the debts together?" It was not until the court enforced that he was shocked that he was carrying the debt. Teacher Wu refused to accept the judgment and went to the court. After the application for retrial was rejected, she decided to apply for supervision from the procuratorate.
"After reviewing the materials, we found doubts, and eliminated false evidence through handwriting identification, and then issued retrial procuratorial suggestions, which brought justice to Wu." Recently, the procurator of Jinjiang City Procuratorate told reporters the whole process of handling the case.
According to the prosecutor, in March 2016, Teacher Wu found that her bank account was frozen, and she was both suspicious and panicked. After several investigations, I realized that I was taken by the court to take enforcement measures and demanded that I pay a bank arrears of principal and interest of more than 1.2 million yuan.
At that time, Teacher Wu was blind. So, she went to the court and found that the judgment stated: In October 2013, Chen (foreer Wu’s ex-husband) and her borrowed 1.28 million yuan from the bank to purchase the Maserati car. The two did not pay the required time. Interest, which is a breach of contract, should repay the bank principal and interest totaling more than 1.2 million yuan.
However, Teacher Wu said that she did not know about the loan and had never signed any loan documents. She had already divorced Chen as early as April 2014, and because the address and contact number in the loan contract were not her. The real information caused her to fail to receive the court's court summons, failed to attend the court hearing, and was unaware of the judgment. After understanding the beginning and the end of the matter, Teacher Wu felt embarrassed and wronged and applied for retrial in the higher court. The request for revoking the first-instance judgment was changed and the respondent’s claim was rejected.