信保经理为业绩骗贷七千多万，花328万买彩票“想中奖堵窟窿”

Core Points - The case involves a fraudulent scheme orchestrated by He Tinghan, manager of Sunshine Property Insurance's Xuchang branch, who misled clients into believing that loans would be repaid by the company while using the funds for personal debts and expenses [1][8] - The total amount of loans involved in the scheme reached 76.23 million yuan, with a remaining unpaid balance of 15.43 million yuan, resulting in losses of 32.36 million yuan for the involved financial institutions [8][13] - He was sentenced to 15 years in prison for loan fraud, money laundering, and forgery, along with a fine of 220,000 yuan and ordered to compensate the victims [13] Summary by Sections Fraudulent Loan Practices - He Tinghan promised clients high rebates of up to 20% for loans, claiming the company would cover repayments, which led to a total of 359 loans processed through 297 individuals [1][8] - Clients were misled into transferring loan amounts to He’s personal accounts, believing the funds were for company use [3][6] Client Experiences - Clients like Ms. Cui were unaware of the high fees associated with the loans, which included substantial insurance and service fees, totaling 14 million yuan in addition to the principal and interest [2][3] - Many clients received forged repayment agreements and assurances from He, which contributed to their trust in the scheme [3][5] Operational Misconduct - The scheme involved falsifying documents, including fake vehicle registration certificates and repayment agreements, to maintain the illusion of legitimacy [11][12] - Employees of Sunshine Property Insurance were also misled, with some unknowingly assisting in the fraudulent activities [3][11] Financial Mismanagement - He attempted to cover the financial shortfall by purchasing lottery tickets, spending 3.28 million yuan with hopes of winning to offset the losses [9][13] - The scheme's unsustainable nature became evident as He continued to recruit new clients to pay off old debts, leading to a significant funding gap [7][8] Legal Consequences - The court upheld the conviction, emphasizing the severity of the fraudulent activities and the extensive financial damage caused to clients and financial institutions [13][14]