防范通过“假离婚”“假破产”逃债

Core Viewpoint - The Supreme People's Court has released seven typical cases of punishing debt evasion, aiming to promote honesty and integrity while enhancing creditor protection and creating a favorable legal business environment [1][2] Group 1: Typical Cases and Legal Framework - The typical cases cover common debt evasion behaviors, including malicious transfer of transaction benefits by actual controllers through related companies, malicious transfer of shares by shareholders, and intentional asset concealment during divorce agreements [1] - The cases clarify three types of responsibilities for debt evasion: civil liability, penalties for obstructing civil litigation, and criminal liability [1] - In one case, shareholders transferred shares at zero consideration to evade capital obligations, resulting in a court ruling that held them liable for supplementary compensation to creditors [1] Group 2: Enforcement and Prevention Measures - The Supreme People's Court emphasizes the need for collaboration among various departments to address the diverse and hidden nature of debt evasion, advocating for both punitive and preventive measures [2] - A notable case involved a divorce agreement that unfairly favored one party, leading to the court's annulment of the agreement to prevent debt evasion through "fake divorces" [2] - The Supreme People's Court is enhancing its governance of debt evasion through improved judgment rules and execution measures, utilizing online monitoring systems and joint credit punishment mechanisms to tackle execution evasion [2]