他的无罪辩解是真是假？

Core Viewpoint - The case highlights the complexities of criminal liability in business financing, emphasizing the importance of thorough investigation to distinguish between genuine business practices and criminal intent [2][3][4]. Group 1: Case Background - In March 2024, a company faced financial difficulties and sought a loan, leading to a connection with an individual named Han through an intermediary [2]. - The company's bank account was misused to receive and transfer 1.3 million yuan in fraudulent funds, resulting in an investigation for aiding information network crime [2][3]. Group 2: Investigation Process - The prosecution initiated a supplementary investigation to determine whether the company representative, Xie, had a legitimate loan need, profit motive, or criminal intent [3]. - Witness testimony from the intermediary, Huang, confirmed that the loan was sought to address financing issues, and the company had a documented financial shortfall [3][4]. Group 3: Evidence Evaluation - Evidence indicated that Xie reported the account's irregularities to the police within three hours, suggesting a lack of profit motive [4]. - Communication records revealed that Han misrepresented himself as a legitimate financial service provider, further supporting Xie's claim of being deceived [4]. Group 4: Conclusion and Aftermath - The evidence did not establish a clear chain of intent for aiding criminal activity, leading to a decision of non-prosecution for Xie [4]. - Post-case, the prosecution provided legal advice to help the company mitigate operational challenges arising from the incident, demonstrating a commitment to fostering a supportive business environment [5].