Figure丨The law is clear by case
The text is based on the case
Editor丨 Clarify the law with cases
Source of the case: Fuping Procuratorate
1. Case review
In Qinghai, there is an Uncle Wang (pseudonym), Uncle Wang is a diligent and honest man, his family is not rich, and he lives a plain and ordinary life.
Uncle Wang is usually frugal, but at the beginning of 2016, a major turning point was ushered in, and Uncle Wang and his neighbors were included in the demolition area, and Uncle Wang was very happy.
Finally, it was his turn to demolish his home, and at the end of 2016, Uncle Wang's bank card received 5.8 million yuan in demolition money.
Uncle Wang's family has been upgraded several grades at once, and has become a millionaire all of a sudden, and the surrounding neighbors are the same, after the demolition, everyone has become rich.
However, Uncle Wang is relatively low-key, and with this demolition money, Uncle Wang still remains the same and lives a plain life.
A few years later, Uncle Wang wanted to improve his happiness, so he looked at a big house in the city, and Uncle Wang wanted to take it in full.
On this day, Uncle Wang got up early, Uncle Wang opened the old wardrobe, pulled out the drawer, and a red cloth wrapped a piece of something.
The uncle untied the red cloth, and it turned out to be a very new bank card. This bank card is not simple, and it is the hope of the whole family.
Uncle took this card and came to the bank to withdraw money, but what he never expected was that the bank staff told Uncle Wang that there were only a few dozen yuan left in the bank card, and the balance in the bank card was insufficient, so he couldn't withdraw money at all.
The uncle immediately became anxious and asked the bank staff, what are you doing with my demolition money of 5.8 million? How did it disappear?
The bank staff said that your 5.8 million yuan was used to buy wealth management products.
Uncle immediately said, my demolition money is an ordinary deposit, you are so bold! How dare you take my money to buy wealth management products? How can you use my money without permission? I am in a hurry to buy a house now, can I help withdraw some of the money?
The bank staff said that the money can be withdrawn, but because you are buying a wealth management product, it has not yet expired, and if you withdraw the money in advance, you will be deducted extraly.
As soon as Uncle Wang heard that there would be additional deductions, he immediately became nervous again. How did my own deposit of 5.8 million yuan become a purchase of wealth management products?
The bank staff found that the situation was not right, and quickly called the leader over and verified the situation again, Uncle Wang's demolition money was indeed the purchase of wealth management products, and it has not expired recently, and a part of the principal may be deducted if it is forcibly withdrawn.
Uncle Wang was in a hurry to use the money, so he took the bank to court in a fit of anger.
II. References
3. From a legal point of view, how do you view this matter? @以案明法
(1) Uncle Wang's appeal
1, Uncle Wang said that he received 5.8 million yuan in demolition money at the end of 2016, which was stored in the bank. Now, I am in a hurry to use the money, and I find that I have inexplicably been used by the bank to buy wealth management products, and now I can't withdraw the money. Uncle Wang just wants to ask the bank to return his 5.8 million yuan immediately.
According to Article 29 of the Commercial Bank Law, commercial banks shall follow the principles of voluntary deposits, free withdrawals, interest-bearing deposits, and confidentiality for depositors in handling personal savings deposit business.
(2) The bank's rebuttal
1. The bank explained that over the years, Uncle Wang has come to the bank many times to handle business, and Uncle Wang himself came to handle it.
1) At the beginning of 2016, Uncle Wang himself handled the card replacement business at the bank, and reported the loss of the original A card, and the uncle himself re-applied for the B card.
2) At the end of 2016, 5.8 million yuan of demolition money was remitted to Uncle Wang's new B card, and it didn't take long for Uncle Wang himself to come over to check the balance of the B card, and then, Uncle Wang himself bought all 5.8 million wealth management products.
3) At the beginning of 2017, Uncle Wang himself took back the wealth management products purchased in 2016, and then, Uncle Wang himself applied for a new C card, so Uncle Wang deposited all the balance of the B card into the new C card, and finally, Uncle Wang cancelled the B card.
4) Since the beginning of 2017, Uncle Wang has used C cards for consumption, transfers, etc.
So far, Uncle Wang's A card and B card have been cancelled, only the C card remains, and the wealth management products purchased with the demolition money are also in the C card.
The bank has made very adequate preparations, and the paper records, transfer records, and video recordings of the various businesses handled by Uncle Wang at the bank site have all been sorted out and packaged, and all submitted to the judge for review.
(3) The place in dispute
1. Regarding what the bank said, Uncle Wang said that he had never handled the cancellation of card A and card B, and these operations were not handled by himself.
2. The bank is also prepared, and the bank issued an appraisal report from a third party, which identified Uncle Wang's signature on various forms for the cancellation of A card and B card, which is indeed Uncle Wang's autograph.
The bank not only showed the signature appraisal report, but also provided a video recording of Uncle Wang's on-site cancellation of card A and card B.
(4) The judge's judgment
1. The judge believes that in this case, Uncle Wang personally participated in the whole process, including canceling bank cards, transferring money, purchasing wealth management products, etc., Uncle Wang is a normal adult, and there is a signature on the spot, and the third-party signature appraisal is the signature of Uncle Wang, so the relevant contracts, agreements and other documents signed by Uncle Wang are legally valid, and if there is a breach of contract, he will bear the corresponding legal responsibility.
According to Article 18 of the Civil Code, an adult is a person with full capacity for civil conduct and may independently carry out civil juristic acts.
According to Article 577 of the Civil Code, if one of the parties fails to perform its contractual obligations or the performance of its contractual obligations does not conform to the agreement, it shall bear the liability for breach of contract such as continuing to perform, taking remedial measures or compensating for losses.
2. In this case, Uncle Wang's bank card involved transfers, cancellations, purchase of wealth management products and other operations, all of which were personally participated by Uncle Wang, and were handled at the bank's on-site counter, and the relevant signatures, video recordings, etc. can be proved, so Uncle Wang's bank card was not operated or used by others without authorization.
Article 6 of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Cases of Civil Disputes over Bank Cards: The people's court shall comprehensively review the evidence submitted by the parties, and comprehensively determine whether there are counterfeit card fraudulent transactions or online fraudulent transactions, taking into account the distance between the place where the bank card transaction is conducted and the location of the real card, whether the cardholder has carried out the basic transaction, the transaction time and the time of the alarm, the cardholder's card usage habits, the number and frequency of bank card fraud, and whether the transaction system, technology and equipment are secure.
3. In this case, the judge held that the bank had all given evidence to explain the claims raised by Uncle Wang, and proved that these operations were all operated by Uncle Wang himself in many aspects, such as paper records, signature drawings, third-party signature appraisals, and video recordings. According to the principle of who asserts and who bears the evidence, the bank provided sufficient supporting materials, but Uncle Wang failed to provide relevant supporting materials.
According to article 67 of the Civil Procedure Law, the parties have the responsibility to provide evidence for their claims. …… Where there is no evidence or the evidence is insufficient to prove the factual assertions of the parties, the party bearing the burden of proof shall bear the adverse consequences.
Article 90 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Civil Procedure Law stipulates that a party shall provide evidence to prove the facts on which its own litigation claim is based or the facts on which the other party's litigation claim is based, unless otherwise provided by law.
To sum up, the judge once again re-sorted and reviewed the case, and finally ruled that the bank was not at fault for rejecting Uncle Wang's claim, and it was still implemented in accordance with the original contract related to wealth management products, and the litigation costs were estimated at 54,000 yuan, all of which were borne by Uncle Wang.
After the first-instance verdict came down, Uncle Wang was very angry, thinking that the family property he had worked hard to obtain all his life was originally stored in the bank, but now he was purchased by others without authorization, resulting in the inability to use his own money. Uncle Wang continued to appeal.
Unexpectedly, the judge of the second instance believed that the evidence provided by the bank was complete and well-founded, which was enough to prove that the bank was not at fault, and finally, the judge of the second instance ruled that the first-instance judgment was upheld, and Uncle Wang's claim was rejected, and the litigation costs of the second-instance trial totaled 52,000 yuan, which were still borne by Uncle Wang.
So far, Uncle Wang has lost two lawsuits, and has borne two litigation costs, estimated at 104,000 yuan.
Fourth, write at the end
Through the study of this law popularization case, I feel that no matter what business we handle, as long as it involves the signature confirmation of the documents or materials, we must read them carefully, ask them clearly, and confirm them before we can sign and draw them.
I think that our bank cards and ID cards and other documents are very important documents, no matter who borrows them, including relatives to borrow, try not to borrow, in principle, these two cards are generally not separated.
Follow @ Case Clearing Law to update popular science legal knowledge every day, hoping that through typical case learning, everyone can learn more legal knowledge.
Annotation:
This article is only for popular law study, if there is any infringement or impropriety, please contact me immediately to delete.
#头条创作挑战赛##普法行动##法律#