Core Viewpoint - The company, Jinlongyu, publicly responded for the first time after its subsidiary was convicted of contract fraud, emphasizing that it was misled and not involved in any fraudulent activities [2][4]. Group 1: Company Response - Jinlongyu held an investor communication meeting attended by key executives to clarify the situation following the court ruling against its subsidiary, Guangzhou Yihai [2]. - The company claims that the losses incurred by Anhui Huawen were due to collusion between Anhui Huawen and Yunnan Huijia, asserting that Guangzhou Yihai was the deceived party [2][7]. - The company has filed an appeal against the first-instance ruling, which found Guangzhou Yihai guilty of contract fraud and ordered it to jointly compensate Anhui Huawen for losses amounting to RMB 18.81 billion [2][4]. Group 2: Details of the Case - The case involves allegations that Yunnan Huijia, through bribery, manipulated the transaction terms with Anhui Huawen, leading to significant financial discrepancies [6][8]. - The prosecution's indictment indicated that employees of Guangzhou Yihai accepted bribes and assisted in the fraudulent activities, but the company maintains that it was unaware of any wrongdoing [7][8]. - The timeline of the alleged fraudulent activities spans from 2008 to 2014, with the company asserting that all related business operations ceased in July 2014 [7][8]. Group 3: Company’s Defense - The company provided six reasons to support its claim of non-involvement in the fraud, highlighting the complicity of Anhui Huawen's management in the fraudulent activities [8][9]. - It was noted that the total storage capacity of Guangzhou Yihai is only 160,000 tons, making it implausible for the company to have stored over 1 million tons of palm oil as claimed by Anhui Huawen [9]. - The company emphasized that it has strict internal control processes and that any actions taken by former employees were personal and not representative of the company's practices [11].

Core Viewpoint - The company, Jinlongyu, publicly responded for the first time after its subsidiary was convicted of contract fraud, emphasizing that it was misled and did not participate in any fraudulent activities [3][4]. Group 1: Company Response - Jinlongyu held an investor communication meeting attended by key executives to clarify the situation regarding its subsidiary, Guangzhou Yihai, which was implicated in a contract fraud case [3]. - The company stated that the losses incurred by Anhui Huawen were due to collusion between Anhui Huawen and Yunnan Huijia, asserting that Guangzhou Yihai was the deceived party [3][7]. - Following the court's ruling, Jinlongyu's stock price fell for two consecutive days, resulting in a market value loss of over 10 billion yuan [3]. Group 2: Legal Proceedings - The case is currently in the appeal stage, and the company plans to apply for a retrial if the appeal is unsuccessful [4]. - The court found Guangzhou Yihai guilty as an accomplice in the contract fraud, with a financial liability of 1.881 billion yuan alongside Yunnan Huijia [3][4]. Group 3: Defense Arguments - The company presented six reasons to defend itself against the fraud allegations, including the assertion that the fraudulent actions were orchestrated by Anhui Huawen and Yunnan Huijia [7][9]. - It was highlighted that the fraudulent activities occurred between 2008 and 2014, and that Anhui Huawen had not raised any issues with Guangzhou Yihai until 2021, nearly a decade later [7][9]. - The company emphasized that it had strict internal control processes in place during the relevant period and denied any compliance issues [11]. Group 4: Operational Insights - Jinlongyu's total oil tank capacity is only 160,000 tons, making it implausible for it to store over 1 million tons of palm oil as claimed by Anhui Huawen [9]. - The company has established an AI technology application team to enhance operational efficiency and market competitiveness through data analysis and AI applications [11].

Core Viewpoint - The company firmly believes that it has not gained any improper benefits and asserts that the judgment against its subsidiary, Guangzhou Yihai, does not constitute a crime, having already filed an appeal [1][2]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - Guangzhou Yihai was sentenced to a fine of 1 million RMB and ordered to jointly compensate economic losses of 1.881 billion RMB to the victim, Anhui Huawen International Trade Co., Ltd. [1] - The court found Guangzhou Yihai guilty of being an accomplice in contract fraud, which occurred between 2008 and 2014, involving the storage of palm oil [1][2]. - The company plans to fully support Guangzhou Yihai's appeal against the first-instance judgment [1]. Group 2: Company Operations and Financial Performance - During the period from 2008 to 2014, Guangzhou Yihai stored approximately 900,000 tons of goods for Anhui Huawen, which allegedly involved false documentation [2]. - The company highlighted inconsistencies in the claims made by Anhui Huawen, stating that palm oil cannot be stored for over ten years without deteriorating [2]. - In Q3 2025, the company reported a revenue of 68.588 billion RMB, a year-on-year increase of 3.96%, and a net profit of 999 million RMB, reflecting a significant year-on-year growth of 196.96% [2].

Core Viewpoint - Jinlongyu (300999.SZ) announced that its subsidiary, Guangzhou Yihai, was convicted of contract fraud, which it disputes and plans to appeal. The case involves a significant palm oil fraud amounting to 5 billion yuan [1][5]. Group 1: Background of the Case - The fraud case originated from a business collaboration between Guangzhou Yihai, Anhui Huawen, and Yunnan Huijia from 2008 to 2014, where Guangzhou Yihai acted as a storage intermediary for palm oil imported by Anhui Huawen [1][2]. - The transaction between Anhui Huawen and Yunnan Huijia was characterized as a financing trade, which is common in bulk commodities but carries risks such as loss of control over goods and funding chain disruptions [2]. Group 2: Details of the Fraud - Yunnan Huijia's actions included bribing Anhui Huawen executives to change the payment terms from "payment before delivery" to "delivery before payment," leading to significant financial misconduct [4]. - The indictment revealed that from March 2012 to December 2014, Yunnan Huijia misappropriated large quantities of palm oil without adequate payment, resulting in direct losses of 3.23 billion yuan and indirect losses of 2.015 billion yuan for Anhui Huawen [4]. Group 3: Legal Proceedings and Company Response - The court ruled that Guangzhou Yihai was an accomplice in the fraud, imposing a fine of 1 million yuan and ordering it to jointly repay 1.881 billion yuan with Yunnan Huijia [5]. - Guangzhou Yihai has publicly denied any involvement in fraudulent activities, asserting that it acted in accordance with the agreements and conducted due diligence [6][8]. Group 4: Market Implications and Observations - The case has raised questions about the operational practices of Anhui Huawen, particularly regarding the long-term storage of palm oil, which contradicts standard trading practices [8]. - Legal experts suggest that the actual benefits from the fraud may not have accrued to Guangzhou Yihai, as the fraud's proceeds appear to have been misappropriated by individuals rather than the company itself [7][9].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the recent legal troubles faced by Golden Dragon Fish (金龙鱼) due to a contract fraud case involving its subsidiary, Guangzhou Yihai (广州益海), which has been accused of participating in a significant palm oil fraud scheme amounting to 5 billion yuan [3][9]. Group 1: Background of the Case - The fraud case involves a commercial collaboration between Guangzhou Yihai, Anhui Huawen International Trade Co., and Yunnan Huijia Import and Export Co., where Guangzhou Yihai acted as a storage intermediary for palm oil transactions [6]. - The fraudulent activities were facilitated by bribery, where Yunnan Huijia's representative bribed key personnel at Anhui Huawen to alter the terms of their trade agreement from "payment before delivery" to "delivery before payment" [6][7]. Group 2: Legal Proceedings and Financial Implications - The first-instance judgment by the Huai Bei Intermediate People's Court found Guangzhou Yihai guilty of contract fraud, imposing a fine of 1 million yuan and ordering it to jointly compensate Anhui Huawen for 1.881 billion yuan [9][10]. - The total direct economic loss to Anhui Huawen is reported to be 3.23 billion yuan, with indirect losses amounting to 2.015 billion yuan [7]. Group 3: Company’s Defense and Market Reactions - Guangzhou Yihai has publicly denied the allegations, claiming it acted in accordance with the agreements and conducted due diligence during the transactions [10][11]. - The management of Golden Dragon Fish highlighted inconsistencies in Anhui Huawen's claims, such as the impracticality of storing palm oil for over a decade without spoilage, which contradicts standard trading practices [12][13].

Core Viewpoint - The company Jinlongyu (300999.SZ) is under scrutiny due to its subsidiary being convicted of contract fraud, facing a joint compensation responsibility exceeding 1.88 billion yuan, while the management maintains their innocence and plans to appeal the ruling [1][2]. Group 1: Legal Situation - Jinlongyu's subsidiary, Guangzhou Yihai, was found guilty of contract fraud and fined 1 million yuan, with a joint compensation liability of 1.881 billion yuan to Anhui Huawen International Trade Co., Ltd. and Yunnan Huijia Import and Export Co., Ltd. [1][2] - The management asserts that Guangzhou Yihai was unaware of the fraudulent activities and did not participate in them, emphasizing their intention to appeal the court's decision [3][4]. Group 2: Financial Impact - For the first three quarters of the year, Jinlongyu reported a net profit attributable to shareholders of 2.749 billion yuan, with the compensation amount representing nearly 70% of this profit [2]. - The company’s president stated that the impact of the lawsuit on current and future profits remains uncertain as the case is still in the appeal period [2]. Group 3: Internal Controls and Management Response - The chairman of Guangzhou Yihai, Fang Yanjing, clarified that the actions of employees involved in bribery were personal and not representative of the company's practices, which have strict internal control processes [5]. - The company has mechanisms in place to verify inventory and maintain communication with Anhui Huawen regarding stock levels, asserting that the alleged fraudulent activities were orchestrated by external parties [5][6].

Core Viewpoint - The company, Yihai Kerry Arawana Holdings Co., Ltd. (referred to as "Golden Dragon Fish"), is contesting a first-instance court ruling that found its subsidiary, Yihai (Guangzhou) Grain and Oil Industry Co., Ltd. (referred to as "Guangzhou Yihai"), guilty of contract fraud, resulting in a fine of 1 million yuan and a compensation liability of 1.881 billion yuan to Anhui Huawen International Trade Co., Ltd. [4][5] Group 1 - Guangzhou Yihai has filed an appeal against the first-instance ruling, asserting that it is not guilty of fraud and that it was misled by Anhui Huawen's executives who engaged in fraudulent activities [4][5] - The chairman of Guangzhou Yihai, Fang Yanjian, stated that the case involves illegal financing activities by Anhui Huawen and Yunnan Huijia Import and Export Co., Ltd., and that Anhui Huawen was complicit in the fraud [4][5] - The company claims that the first-instance ruling contradicts basic business logic, citing that Guangzhou Yihai's oil tank capacity is only 160,000 tons, making it impossible to store over 1 million tons of palm oil as alleged [6] Group 2 - The company reported that its revenue for the first three quarters of 2025 was 184.3 billion yuan, with a net profit of 2.749 billion yuan [6] - If the second-instance ruling upholds the first-instance decision, Golden Dragon Fish may face a financial impact where the compensation amount could account for approximately 68% of its net profit for the first three quarters [6] - As of November 21, the stock price of Golden Dragon Fish closed at 30.88 yuan per share, reflecting a decline of 2.92% [7]

Core Viewpoint - The company, Yihai Kerry Arawana Holdings Co., Ltd. (referred to as "Golden Dragon Fish"), is contesting a first-instance court ruling that found its subsidiary, Yihai (Guangzhou) Grain and Oil Industry Co., Ltd. (referred to as "Guangzhou Yihai"), guilty of contract fraud, resulting in a fine of 1 million yuan and a compensation liability of 1.881 billion yuan to Anhui Huawen International Trade Co., Ltd. [3][4][6] Group 1 - Guangzhou Yihai received a criminal judgment on November 19, which stated that it was an accomplice in contract fraud, leading to a significant economic loss for Anhui Huawen [3][4] - The company has filed an appeal against the judgment and maintains that it is innocent, asserting that it was misled by Anhui Huawen's executives who were involved in fraudulent activities [4][5] - The management of Golden Dragon Fish expressed shock at the ruling and emphasized their commitment to supporting Guangzhou Yihai in the appeal process [4][6] Group 2 - The chairman of Guangzhou Yihai, Fang Yanjian, claimed that the case's essence involves Anhui Huawen and Yunnan Huijia engaging in illegal financing trade, with the latter allegedly bribing Anhui Huawen's executives [5][6] - Fang Yanjian stated that the company has no reason to assist in defrauding a state-owned enterprise and highlighted the significant investments made by the parent company in China, amounting to approximately 100 billion yuan [5][6] - The president of Golden Dragon Fish, Mu Yanquan, pointed out that the judgment contradicts basic business logic, as Guangzhou Yihai's storage capacity could not accommodate the alleged volume of palm oil involved in the case [6][7] Group 3 - The company reported that its revenue for the first three quarters of 2025 was 184.3 billion yuan, with a net profit of 2.749 billion yuan [7] - If the appeal fails, Golden Dragon Fish may face a financial impact, as the compensation amount could represent about 68% of its net profit for the period [7] - As of November 21, Golden Dragon Fish's stock price closed at 30.88 yuan per share, reflecting a decline of 2.92% [7][8]

（原标题：金龙鱼"悲壮"上诉：从未参与诈骗 ， "我们是被蒙蔽的"） 21世纪经济报道记者 杨坪 在公告子公司被判合同诈骗罪后，金龙鱼首次公开做出回应。 11月21日下午，千亿市值粮油巨头金龙鱼（300999.SZ）召开投资者交流会，含董事兼总裁穆彦魁、副 总裁邵斌，及涉事子公司益海（广州）粮油工业有限公司（简称"广州益海"）董事长兼总经理房彦江在 内的6名董监高出席了这次会议。 2008年至2014年，广州益海作为中转仓储方，负责储存安徽华文代理云南惠嘉进口的棕榈油。 会上，穆彦魁多次强调，安徽华文国际经贸股份有限公司（以下简称"安徽华文"）的损失是其与云南惠 嘉进出口有限公司（以下简称"云南惠嘉"）内外勾结造成的，广州益海才是被蒙蔽的一方，广州益海并 未参与任何"诈骗行为"。 此前，金龙鱼曾公告，子公司广州益海涉嫌帮助云南惠嘉实施合同诈骗，被安徽华文起诉。近日，淮北 市中级人民法院作出的一审《刑事判决书》结果显示，广州益海构成合同诈骗罪，系从犯，须对安徽华 文的经济损失人民币18.81亿元与云南惠嘉承担共同退赔责任。（详情请进 21 世纪经济报道文章《子公 司被判合同诈骗罪 金龙鱼发表声明：已上诉》） 这 ...

在公告子公司被判合同诈骗罪后，金龙鱼首次公开做出回应。 11月21日下午，千亿市值粮油巨头金龙鱼（300999.SZ）召开投资者交流会，含董事兼总裁穆彦魁、副 总裁邵斌，及涉事子公司益海（广州）粮油工业有限公司（简称"广州益海"）董事长兼总经理房彦江在 内的6名董监高出席了这次会议。 会上，穆彦魁多次强调，安徽华文国际经贸股份有限公司（以下简称"安徽华文"）的损失是其与云南惠 嘉进出口有限公司（以下简称"云南惠嘉"）内外勾结造成的，广州益海才是被蒙蔽的一方，广州益海并 未参与任何"诈骗行为"。 此前，金龙鱼曾公告，子公司广州益海涉嫌帮助云南惠嘉实施合同诈骗，被安徽华文起诉。近日，淮北 市中级人民法院作出的一审《刑事判决书》结果显示，广州益海构成合同诈骗罪，系从犯，须对安徽华 文的经济损失人民币18.81亿元与云南惠嘉承担共同退赔责任。（详情请进 21 世纪经济报道文章《子公 司被判合同诈骗罪金龙鱼发表声明：已上诉》） 这一结果披露后，11月20日-21日，金龙鱼股价连续两日下跌。 房彦江表示，目前案件尚处于一审上诉期，二审的时间尚无法确定；公司不认可一审的判决，如二审败 诉，广州益海会坚决依法申请再审。 总裁 ...