受损股民可至新浪股民维权平台登记该公司维权：http://wq.finance.sina.com.cn/ 二、退市不影响维权 被投资者起诉源于2024年12月25日公司收到证监会下发的《行政处罚决定书》，具体来看，其子公司虚 构服务器、软件和系统集成服务销售业务，虚增收入和利润，导致2019年至2023年年度报告存在虚假记 载。 其中，2021、2022年虚假记载的营业收入金额合计达9.95亿元，占两年披露的年度营业收入合计金额的 57.85%；虚假记载的利润总额金额合计达6.96亿元，占两年披露的年度利润总额合计金额的56.31%。 虽已退市，但公司主体仍在运转，不影响维权事宜。投资者可依法通过诉讼等途径维护自身合法权益此 外。遭受亏损的投资者还可参与维权，挽回投资损失。 关注@新浪证券、微信关注新浪券商基金、百度搜索新浪股民维权、访问新浪财经客户端、 新浪财经首页都能找到我 一、公司出具调解方案 上海沪紫律师事务所刘鹏律师团队代理的案件近日陆续收到核损报告和调解方案。此前已有胜诉判决， 值得注意的是此案采用示范性判决机制审理，后续同类型案件也将依据"同案同判"原则获得更快判决。 不过该公司已于去年3月6日 ...

(07 First 型 AGER and S 60% 24 ST t al S e the first and 19:37 2017 200 前 the first and s 121.00 the for the for 47 the f STERS res play // 11 8 t Print . and P s 一、什么情况下，退市股票能索赔？ 股市有风险，投资须谨慎。退市本身是不能直接索赔的，这是作为投资者需要承担的投资风险。 但是，如果退市的公司存在信息披露违规行为，比如财务造假、违规占用资金、违规担保、隐瞒重大诉讼或债务等，对这类有信披违规的退市公司可索赔。 实践中，绝大多数退市的公司都有违规，因此股民有索赔的机会。 据北京时择律师事务所臧小丽律师团队不完全统计，截止到2026年2月2日，有信披违规的退市公司，并且还在诉讼时效期内的可索赔股票，共计有54只，他 们分别是东方通、龙宇股份、卓朗科技、鹏博士、东方集团、江苏吴中、首航高科、华仪电气、普利制药、浙江富润、海越能源、三盛教育、左江科技、鹏 都农牧、华铁股份、长江健康、未来股份、阳光城、太安堂、园城黄金、上海易连、超华科技、青岛中程、长药 ...

受损股民可至新浪股民维权平台登记该公司维权：http://wq.finance.sina.com.cn/ 关注@新浪证券、微信关注新浪券商基金、百度搜索新浪股民维权、访问新浪财经客户端、 新浪财经首页都能找到我 一、投资者一审胜诉 上海沪紫律师事务所刘鹏律师团队代理的案件近日陆续收到胜诉判决。该公司虽已退市但不影响索赔权 利。（刘鹏律师专栏） 值得注意的是此案采用示范性判决机制审理，后续同类型案件也将依据"同案同判"原则获得更快判决。 不过该公司已于去年3月6日摘牌，也是退市新规出台后首家被实施重大违法强制退市的公司。 回溯本案，2024年12月25日，公司收到证监会下发的行政处罚决定书，认定公司连续多年造假，情节严 重，相关行为已触及《股票上市规则》规定的重大违法强制退市情形。对于投资者来说无疑遭受了巨大 的损失。 依据相关法律法规，符合于2019年9月19日-2024年3月14日期间买入，并在2024年3月15日之后卖出 或仍持有而亏损的投资者即可加入。（卓朗科技维权入口） 二、退市不影响维权 受损股民可至新浪股民维权平台登记该公司维权：http://wq.finance.sina.com.cn/ 关注@ ...

受损股民可至新浪股民维权平台登记该公司维权：http://wq.finance.sina.com.cn/ 关注@新浪证券、微信关注新浪券商基金、百度搜索新浪股民维权、访问新浪财经客户端、 新浪财经首页都能找到我 上海久诚律师事务所股票索赔律师许峰提示，卓朗科技（600225，津信科5，代码400259）虚假陈述引 发的投资者索赔案已经进入批量调解阶段。（许峰律师专栏） 许峰律师代理的卓朗科技投资者索赔案此前已出现重要进展，在法院判决投资者胜诉后，投资者目前已 经收到法院判定的赔偿款项。许峰律师代理的首位卓朗科技投资者索赔已经获得胜诉以及获赔到位。律 师团队同步还在继续推进后续案件的立案工作，还在继续接受其他投资者的索赔委托。 2024年12月25日晚，卓朗科技公告收到证监会《行政处罚决定书》，经查，2019年至2023年，卓朗科技 子公司天津卓朗科技发展有限公司虚构服务器、软件和系统集成服务销售业务，虚增收入和利润。上述 虚假销售业务导致卓朗科技2019年至2023年年度报告分别虚增营业收入24，915.28万元、48，912.89万 元、33，861.50万元、65，612.78万元、8，225.45万元， ...

Core Viewpoint - The regulatory environment for listed companies in China has intensified in 2025, with over 80 companies facing penalties for information disclosure violations, reflecting a shift from lenient to strict enforcement by the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) [1][6] Group 1: Regulatory Actions - The CSRC has maintained a high-pressure stance on information disclosure violations, with penalties reaching up to 10 million yuan for companies and 500,000 yuan for responsible individuals, a significant increase from previous years [1][6] - Various types of violations have been identified, including failure to disclose periodic reports, financial fraud, and misuse of funds by actual controllers [1][6] Group 2: Financial Fraud Cases - Notable cases of financial fraud include: - Notai Bio, which inflated revenue by 30 million yuan through a closed-loop funding operation and faced a fine of 76.2 million yuan [2][8] - *ST Zitian, which reported inflated revenue of 2.499 billion yuan over two years, with 78.63% of its 2023 revenue being fictitious [2][8] - *ST Suwu, which failed to disclose its actual controller for several years and inflated revenue by 1.771 billion yuan while concealing 4.755 billion yuan in non-operating fund occupation [2][8] Group 3: Consequences of Violations - The implementation of a strict delisting mechanism has led to over 10 companies facing mandatory delisting due to severe violations, with *ST Yuancheng being the 13th company to face such consequences in 2025 [2][8] - The involvement of third-party entities in fraudulent activities has also been addressed, with penalties imposed on accomplices, such as the case of Nanjing Qingya Trading Co., which faced a fine of 7 million yuan and a 10-year market ban [2][8] Group 4: Shareholder Rights and Legal Actions - The regulatory framework now includes comprehensive accountability measures for not only the companies but also responsible individuals and intermediaries involved in fraudulent activities [4][11] - Shareholders affected by violations have successfully pursued legal actions, with several cases resulting in compensation for investors, highlighting the importance of active participation in seeking redress [4][11]

关注@新浪证券、微信关注新浪券商基金、百度搜索新浪股民维权、访问新浪财经客户端、 新浪财经首页都能找到我们！ 上海久诚律师事务所股票索赔律师许峰提示，卓朗科技（600225，津信科5，代码400259）虚假陈述引 发的投资者索赔案还在持续推进中。（许峰律师专栏） 受损股民可至新浪股民维权平台登记该公司维权：http://wq.finance.sina.com.cn/ 责任编辑：韦子蓉 受损股民可至新浪股民维权平台登记该公司维权：http://wq.finance.sina.com.cn/ 前期许峰律师代理的卓朗科技投资者索赔案出现重要进展，在法院判决投资者胜诉后，投资者目前已经 收到法院判定的赔偿款项。许峰律师代理的首位卓朗科技投资者索赔已经获得胜诉以及获赔到位。许峰 律师团队同步还在继续推进后续案件的立案工作，还在继续接受其他投资者的索赔委托。 2024年12月25日晚，卓朗科技公告收到证监会《行政处罚决定书》，经查，2019年至2023年，卓朗科技 子公司天津卓朗科技发展有限公司虚构服务器、软件和系统集成服务销售业务，虚增收入和利润。 上述虚假销售业务导致卓朗科技2019年至2023年年度报告分别虚增营业 ...

受损股民可至新浪股民维权平台登记该公司维权：http://wq.finance.sina.com.cn/ 关注@新浪证券、微信关注新浪券商基金、百度搜索新浪股民维权、访问新浪财经客户端、 新浪财经首页都能找到我们！ 近日，备受关注的投资者诉天津卓朗信息科技股份有限公司（原简称：卓朗科技、退市卓朗，原证券代 码：600225）证券虚假陈述案又有新进展。 曾代理投资者告赢130余家上市公司并获赔的浙江裕丰律师事务所厉健律师表示，卓朗科技案索赔时效 尚未届满，我们已代理多批股民提交起诉材料。 案情回溯，2024年12月26日，卓朗科技发布《关于收到中国券监会<行政处罚决定书>的公告》。公告 显示，经查：一、卓朗科技定期报告存在虚假记载，2019 年至2023年，卓朗科技子公司天津卓朗科技 发展有限公司虚构服务器、软件和系统集成服务销售业务，虚增收入和利润。二、卓朗科技未按规定披 露对外担保，未在2019年至2020年年度报告中披露对外担保情况，导致卓朗科技2019年至2020年年度报 告存在重大遗漏。 根据最高人民法院虚假陈述司法解释，上市公司等因证券虚假陈述行为导致投资者权益受损，投资者可 以依法起诉索赔，索赔范 ...

卓朗科技2019年至2023年，卓朗科技子公司天津卓朗科技发展有限公司（以下简称卓朗发展）虚构服务器、软件和系统集成服务 销售业务，虚增收入和利润。2019年至2023年年度报告分别虚增营业收入24,915.28万元、48,912.89万元、33,861.50万元、 65,612.78万元、8,225.45万元，占各期对外披露营业收入的21.05%、45.19%、41.60%、72.46%、13.22%；分别虚增利润总额 24,915.28万元、30,989.93万元、33,861.50万元、35,713.19万元、8,225.45万元，占各期对外披露利润总额绝对值的33.81%、 7.68%、41.26%、86.08%、50.27%。 （二）卓朗科技未按规定披露对外担保 2019年9月19日，卓朗科技子公司天津恒泰汇金融资租赁有限公司（以下简称恒泰汇金）与天津农村商业银行股份有限公司河西支 行（以下简称天津农商行）签订抵押合同，约定恒泰汇金以名下27台涡轮风扇发动机为天津农商行对大新华航空有限公司的债权 （包括7.02亿元本金及利息等费用）提供担保。抵押物认定价值为4.91亿元，占2019年、2020年年末 ...

Core Viewpoint - The case of Tianjin Zhuolang Information Technology Co., Ltd. (delisted Zhuolang) highlights the capital market's zero tolerance for financial fraud, with a recent court ruling confirming the company's long-standing fraudulent activities and resulting in compensation to affected investors [1][3]. Summary by Sections Legal Proceedings - Tianjin First Intermediate People's Court announced the completion of the ruling and compensation execution for the securities fraud case involving delisted Zhuolang, with compensation paid to investors within seven months of the case being filed [1][3]. Fraudulent Activities - From 2019 to 2023, Zhuolang's subsidiary, Tianjin Zhuolang Technology Development Co., Ltd., engaged in systematic financial fraud by fabricating core business operations, leading to inflated revenues and profits [3][4]. - The fraudulent activities were primarily focused on two business segments: server and software/system integration services, involving fictitious procurement and sales to related companies without actual product flow [3][4]. Financial Impact - The scale of financial distortion was significant, with reported inflated revenues of 249 million, 489 million, 339 million, 656 million, and 82 million yuan over the years, representing up to 72.46% of disclosed revenues [4]. - The inflated profit totals for the same period were 249 million, 310 million, 339 million, 357 million, and 82 million yuan, with a maximum of 86.08% of disclosed profit totals [4]. Regulatory Actions - The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) previously imposed administrative penalties on Zhuolang, including a fine of 10 million yuan, and the company was officially delisted on March 6, 2025, due to severe violations [4]. - The case utilized a demonstration litigation mechanism, providing a reference for similar cases and reinforcing the message that delisting does not equate to exemption from liability [4][5].

Core Viewpoint - The A-share market is experiencing an unprecedented wave of delistings due to major violations, with a record number of companies forced to delist as regulatory scrutiny intensifies [1][6][10] Group 1: Delisting Trends - As of October 15, 2023, 13 companies have triggered mandatory delisting indicators due to major violations, marking a historical high [6][10] - Among these, 8 companies have already been delisted, including notable cases like Zhuolang Technology and Dongfang Group [6][10] - The delisting wave has highlighted the role of investment banks as gatekeepers, with 11 brokerage firms involved in the delisted companies [1][6] Group 2: Investment Banks' Responsibilities - Many problematic companies frequently changed their investment banks during periods of financial misconduct, complicating accountability [2][10] - Most involved investment banks issued "no objection" or "no issues found" reports during the supervision period, raising questions about their diligence [2][10] - The regulatory environment is pushing investment banks to reassess their responsibilities and improve their oversight practices [2][15] Group 3: Case Studies of Violations - ST Dongtong, involved in financial fraud from 2019 to 2022, had its investment bank, First Capital, implicated in fraudulent activities during a stock issuance [8][12] - Guohua Securities was the only firm to issue a risk warning regarding Jiuyou Co., while others remained silent despite ongoing fraud investigations [12][13] - Highong Data had the longest duration of fraud (2015-2023) and changed investment banks multiple times, indicating a pattern of evasion [10][11] Group 4: Regulatory Impact on Investment Banks - The shift towards stricter regulations has led to increased scrutiny of investment banks' roles, with many now enhancing their due diligence processes [15] - Investment banks are reportedly increasing their manpower and resources dedicated to ongoing supervision, reflecting a shift in focus due to regulatory pressures [15]