Workflow
三堂会审丨准确认定违规从事营利活动违纪和受贿犯罪

Core Points - The case involves Li, who used his position to help his sister secure engineering projects, resulting in profits of 1.25 million yuan for her [3] - Li's actions were classified as a violation of discipline, leading to his expulsion from the party and public office [4] - The court sentenced Li to 11 years and 6 months in prison for bribery, with a fine of 700,000 yuan [5] Summary by Sections Basic Case Facts - Li served as the Party Secretary and Chairman of Company B, a state-owned enterprise, from 2020 to 2022 [3] - He facilitated his sister's partnership in projects, resulting in her earning 1.25 million yuan [3] - Li received a total of 8.04 million yuan in illegal benefits through his position [3] Investigation Process - The investigation began on May 8, 2024, with Li being placed under detention on May 10, 2024 [4] - The case was transferred to the People's Procuratorate for prosecution on August 8, 2024 [4] - Li was expelled from the party and public office on September 12, 2024 [4] Court Proceedings - The People's Procuratorate filed charges against Li on September 30, 2024 [5] - The first-instance court sentenced him on February 17, 2025, and he appealed the decision [5] - The second-instance court upheld the original ruling on June 9, 2025 [6] Legal Analysis of Actions - Li's actions were deemed a violation of discipline for using his position to benefit his sister [10] - The distinction between bribery and violation of discipline was discussed, with Li's case not constituting bribery due to lack of intent to receive bribes [10] - The legal framework for defining bribery and violations of discipline was outlined, emphasizing the need for intent and the nature of the benefits received [9][13] Joint Bribery Considerations - The case also examined the concept of joint bribery, where Li and his sister were found to have conspired to receive benefits [15] - The court determined that the benefits received by Li were a result of their collusion, thus constituting joint bribery [16] Profit Distribution Analysis - The discussion included whether profits exceeding Li's investment share should be counted as bribery [17] - The court concluded that the excess profits were indeed part of the bribery scheme, as they were linked to Li's misuse of his position [21]