Core Points - The company Haosai has been prosecuted for alleged unit bribery involving its former chairman and general manager, Dai Baolin [3][4] - The court has sentenced Haosai to a fine of 7 million RMB and Dai Baolin to three years in prison with a four-year probation, along with a fine of 3 million RMB [4] - The company has acknowledged the situation and committed to enhancing internal controls and improving information disclosure quality [6] Legal Proceedings - On December 12, 2024, the Wuhan New District Supervisory Committee initiated an investigation into Dai Baolin for suspected illegal activities [3] - Dai Baolin was detained on December 12, 2024, and was arrested on June 19, 2025 [3] - The case has concluded with the court's decision, and the company is required to pay a fine [4] Financial Impact - Haosai reported a revenue of 265 million RMB in the first three quarters of the year, reflecting a nearly 30% year-on-year decline [6] - The company incurred a net loss of approximately 26.31 million RMB during the same period [6] - As of November 5, the market capitalization of Haosai is approximately 2.5 billion RMB [6] Asset Recovery - The Wuhan New District Supervisory Committee has recovered approximately 21.52 million RMB of illegal gains from Haosai, which will be remitted to the national treasury [5]

Core Viewpoint - The company, Haosai (002963.SZ), has been convicted of corporate bribery and faces significant financial penalties, impacting its recent financial performance [1] Financial Impact - The company has been fined 7 million yuan for corporate bribery [1] - The former chairman and general manager, Dai Baolin, has received a three-year prison sentence, suspended for four years, along with a personal fine of 3 million yuan [1] - The company is required to return illegal gains amounting to 21,516,124.39 yuan, which will be paid to the national treasury [1] - The total amount of fines and confiscated illegal gains paid by the company is 28,516,124.39 yuan, representing 15.90% of the company's most recent audited net profit attributable to shareholders [1]

Group 1 - The stock price of Haosai closed at 13.26 yuan on August 11, down 0.52 yuan, representing a decline of 3.77% [1] - The trading volume on that day was 74,833 lots, with a total transaction value of 99 million yuan, and a turnover rate of 6.08% [1] - Haosai operates in the decoration and renovation industry, focusing on the design, construction, and maintenance of lighting projects [1] Group 2 - The company is registered in Beijing and has a total market capitalization of 1.994 billion yuan [1] - The former chairman, Dai Baolin, has been prosecuted for alleged unit bribery and is awaiting trial, having resigned from all company positions [1] - Dai Baolin's 23.36% voting rights have been fully entrusted to his son, Dai Congqi [1] Group 3 - On August 11, the net outflow of main funds from Haosai was 3.2432 million yuan, accounting for 0.2% of the circulating market value [1] - Over the past five days, the cumulative net outflow of main funds reached 8.0803 million yuan, representing 0.5% of the circulating market value [1]

Core Viewpoint - Haosai and its former chairman Dai Baolin have been prosecuted for alleged unit bribery, which has raised concerns about the company's governance and future performance [1][6][21]. Group 1: Legal Issues - On August 8, Haosai announced that it and former chairman Dai Baolin were prosecuted for alleged unit bribery by the Wuhan New District People's Procuratorate [1][6]. - The case is currently in the stage of awaiting the first-instance trial, with the investigation initiated on December 12, 2024, leading to Dai Baolin's detention [9][11]. - Dai Baolin was arrested on June 19, 2025, and prior to this, he had not disclosed his detention or arrest to the company [12][11]. Group 2: Management Changes - Dai Baolin resigned from his positions as chairman and general manager in early June 2025, citing reaching the legal retirement age, and subsequently became an honorary chairman [13][15]. - Following his resignation, Dai Congqi was appointed as the new general manager, and he became the legal representative of Haosai [16]. - Dai Baolin transferred his voting rights for 23.36% of Haosai's shares to his son, Dai Congqi, establishing a unified action relationship among the family members [17][20]. Group 3: Financial Performance - Haosai is expected to report a significant loss for the first half of 2025, with projected net losses ranging from 30.39 million to 38.51 million yuan, a decline of 495.35% to 600.95% year-on-year [21][22]. - The anticipated losses are attributed to adjustments in investment rhythms in the infrastructure and real estate sectors, leading to a decrease in demand in the lighting engineering industry and increased competition [21][22].

Core Viewpoint - Haosai and its former chairman Dai Baolin have been prosecuted for alleged unit bribery, which has raised concerns regarding the company's governance and operational integrity [1][4][16]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - On August 7, 2025, Haosai received a prosecution notice from the Wuhan New District People's Procuratorate regarding allegations of unit bribery against both the company and Dai Baolin [4]. - The case is currently in the stage of awaiting the first-instance trial [5]. - The investigation into Dai Baolin began on December 12, 2024, when the Wuhan New District Supervisory Committee initiated a case against him for suspected illegal activities [5]. Group 2: Company Governance Changes - Following the legal issues, Dai Baolin resigned from his positions as chairman and general manager in early June 2025, citing reaching the legal retirement age [10]. - Dai Congqi was appointed as the new general manager, and he became the legal representative of Haosai on June 24, 2025 [11]. - Dai Baolin transferred his voting rights associated with 23.36% of Haosai's shares to his son, Dai Congqi, establishing a unified action relationship among the family members [14]. Group 3: Financial Performance - Haosai is expected to report a significant loss for the first half of 2025, with projected net losses ranging from 30.39 million to 38.51 million yuan, a year-on-year decline of 495.35% to 600.95% [15]. - The anticipated losses are attributed to adjustments in investment rhythms in the infrastructure and real estate sectors, leading to a temporary decline in demand in the lighting engineering industry [16].

Group 1 - The company and its former chairman, Dai Baolin, are facing prosecution for alleged unit bribery, with the case currently awaiting trial [1] - The investigation into Dai Baolin began on December 12, 2024, leading to his detention and subsequent arrest on June 19, 2025 [1] - As of the announcement date, Dai Baolin is no longer part of the company's board or management and is not the controlling shareholder [1] Group 2 - The company maintains a robust governance and internal control mechanism, with all business operations proceeding normally [2] - The company's control has not changed, and the board is functioning legally while management continues to perform daily responsibilities [2] - The management is prepared to address any potential impacts and risks to uphold the company's brand reputation and ensure business stability [2]

Core Points - The case involves a public institution (A unit) and a private company (B company), where the head of A unit, Shen, solicited a donation of 1 million yuan from Zhang, the actual controller of B company, to fund a research project [1][2] - The donation was used to gain favorable treatment in project bidding, with B company winning contracts worth over 20 million yuan as a result [1][2] - Different legal interpretations exist regarding the nature of the donation, with one view categorizing it as bribery and the other as a legitimate donation benefiting the unit [2][3] Summary by Sections - **Nature of the Donation**: The 1 million yuan donation from Zhang to A unit is characterized as a bribe rather than a legitimate donation, as it was not voluntary and aimed at securing improper benefits [3][4] - **Legal Implications**: Shen's actions are analyzed under the lens of bribery laws, with the consensus leaning towards classifying the donation as unit bribery, and Shen's subsequent actions as both unit bribery and personal embezzlement [2][5] - **Financial Misappropriation**: Shen misappropriated 150,000 yuan for personal use from the donation, which constitutes embezzlement under criminal law, highlighting the misuse of public funds [5][6]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses cases of state employees using their positions to inflate transaction processes, resulting in profits for third parties, and analyzes the legal implications of such actions [1][6]. Case Summaries Case One - A state-owned company manager, knowing that a procurement was already established, directed the company to sign a procurement agreement with a specific individual to inflate transaction costs, resulting in a commission payment that was misappropriated [2][8]. - The legal opinions diverge on whether the manager's actions constitute embezzlement or illegal profit-making for relatives, with a consensus leaning towards embezzlement due to the nature of the transaction [4][9]. Case Two - A financing platform manager, in collusion with a government official, inflated transaction processes to facilitate a payment to the official's son for minimal services rendered, despite the company having direct financing options [3][12]. - Similar to Case One, legal opinions vary, but the prevailing view is that the manager's actions constitute bribery and embezzlement due to the intent to benefit a third party while misusing public funds [11][14]. Legal Analysis - The article emphasizes that actions taken by state employees to inflate transactions for personal gain or to benefit specific individuals can lead to serious legal consequences, including charges of embezzlement and bribery [7][11]. - The distinction between embezzlement and illegal profit-making for relatives is crucial, as the former involves direct misappropriation of public funds, while the latter pertains to the improper allocation of business opportunities [10][14].