新京报消息，8月22日，河南开封货车司机于东（化名）三年间第二次被取保候审。他卷入的是一起涉及 百余名大货司机的盗窃案，案中130余名货车司机被指长期盗窃同一家公司的化肥。 从晋开公司拉化肥的大货车。受访者供图 在案证据很明确。有人在销赃时被抓现行，赃物、销赃的交易记录，以及司机承认偷卖货物的供述，一应 俱全。多名司机在得知同行被抓后主动投案，并将"赃款"退还给报案的公司。 然而三年过去，这起案件却悬而未决。除19名涉案司机陆续因盗窃罪被判刑，因其余大部分司机"无社会 危害性"，检察院决定不予批准逮捕。警方认定的犯罪金额从几万到几十万，缩水到几千元到3万元。 因买卖双方存在磅差、运输损耗等原因，为确保买家收到足够的化肥，卖家在发货时会多发几袋，涉案司 机正是卖掉了这些"赠品"获利。几名案外的司机告诉新京报记者，这在货运行业很普遍，几乎是"公开的秘 密"。但百余名司机因此被控盗窃罪的情况此前却鲜有发生。 构成盗窃罪的前提是有蒙受损失的被害人，该案的争议也由此而来——被倒卖的化肥归谁所有，是卖方、 买方还是司机？案中各方对此各执一词，受访的法学学者也观点不一。 司机们的行为在法律上如何定性？目前，案发3年后，包括 ...

Core Viewpoint - The case involving over a hundred truck drivers accused of stealing fertilizer from a single company has been ongoing for three years, with legal ambiguities surrounding the ownership of the sold goods and the definition of theft in this context [1][2][16]. Group 1: Case Background - The case began in May 2022 when several truck drivers were caught selling bags of fertilizer from their loads, leading to the arrest of over 130 drivers [4][3]. - Evidence against the drivers includes direct admissions of selling stolen goods, transaction records, and the capture of individuals selling the stolen fertilizer [1][4]. - The police initially identified a significant amount of theft, but the estimated value of the stolen goods has since decreased from tens of thousands to amounts below 30,000 yuan [1][9]. Group 2: Industry Practices - In the freight industry, it is common for sellers to provide extra goods to ensure buyers receive sufficient quantities, which the drivers have exploited by selling these "bonus" items [5][6]. - The practice of manipulating weight measurements using techniques to create discrepancies is widespread among truck drivers, with some drivers openly discussing these methods in industry groups [9][10]. - The drivers involved in the case argue that their actions are a common industry practice and do not constitute theft, as no party has suffered a loss [6][12]. Group 3: Legal Ambiguities - A central legal question is the ownership of the fertilizer sold by the drivers, with conflicting opinions on whether the goods belonged to the company or the buyers at the time of sale [16][17]. - Legal experts are divided on whether the drivers' actions constitute theft, with some arguing that the excess goods should be considered a loss accepted by the company, while others maintain that the company retains ownership [18][17]. - The ongoing legal proceedings have resulted in some drivers being convicted, while many others remain in limbo as the case continues to unfold [14][16].

Core Points - UBS AG's former executive Sun Jianrong was convicted of money laundering and contempt of court, receiving a sentence of ten years and six months in prison for embezzling over HK$130 million from mainland clients [1][2][3] - The Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission has permanently banned Sun from returning to the financial industry [1] Group 1: Embezzlement Details - Sun Jianrong misappropriated funds from clients, specifically the couple Yu Quanli and Lou Xiaojie, transferring a total of 1.3 billion RMB (approximately HK$1.5 billion) into various mainland bank accounts, including a direct transfer of 5 million RMB to his own account [2][3] - To deceive the clients, Sun provided forged bank statements and transfer requests, making it appear that the funds were in transit [2][3] Group 2: Misuse of Funds - Investigations revealed that the embezzled funds were funneled into Sun's controlled bank accounts, with significant amounts in various currencies, including HK$50.62 million and US$515,000 [3] - Sun used the misappropriated funds to purchase four properties in London and two in mainland China, totaling approximately HK$29 million, and acquired six luxury cars [3] Group 3: Criminal Background of Victims - The plaintiffs, Yu Quanli and Lou Xiaojie, were identified as individuals involved in organized illegal activities, specifically a prostitution ring in Nanjing, which raises questions about the source of the funds [4][6] - Yu Quanli was convicted in 2020 for running a large-scale prostitution operation and sentenced to 15 years in prison [6]

Core Points - UBS Group's former deputy director, Sun Jianrong, was convicted of money laundering and contempt of court, receiving a sentence of ten years and six months in prison, along with a lifetime ban from the financial industry in Hong Kong [1][2] Group 1: Case Details - Sun Jianrong misappropriated over HK$130 million from clients, specifically the couple Yu Quanli and Lou Xiaojie, between November 2016 and February 2018, using fake documents to deceive them [1][2] - The funds were transferred to 29 different bank accounts, with a notable transfer of RMB 5 million directly into Sun's own account [1][2] - The investigation revealed that the misappropriated funds were funneled into two Hong Kong bank accounts controlled by Sun, with significant amounts in various currencies [2] Group 2: Victim Background - The plaintiffs, Yu Quanli and Lou Xiaojie, were identified as not being ordinary individuals, with the court suggesting that the funds likely originated from organized illegal activities, specifically a prostitution ring [3][4] - Yu Quanli was later convicted in 2020 for running a large-scale prostitution operation in Nanjing, receiving a 15-year prison sentence [7] Group 3: Legal Proceedings - The court found overwhelming evidence against Sun Jianrong, including his admission of using the misappropriated funds for personal investments and purchases [5] - The court ruled that the plaintiffs' claims for fraud and unjust enrichment were valid, despite the illegal nature of the funds involved [7][8]

Core Points - The Huizhou Municipal Bureau of Commerce announced a recovery of mistakenly issued subsidy funds amounting to 300,000 yuan due to an audit oversight, affecting 28 applicants [1][4] - The subsidies were incorrectly granted to applicants whose old vehicles were registered as light trucks, which do not meet the criteria for the passenger vehicle replacement subsidy program [4][6] - A legal framework is established for the recovery process, requiring recipients to return the funds by August 25, 2025, or face legal action and potential credit record implications [4][6] Group 1 - The Huizhou Municipal Bureau of Commerce identified an error in the issuance of automobile replacement subsidies, leading to a total of 300,000 yuan being incorrectly distributed [1] - The audit revealed that 28 applicants submitted old vehicle registration documents that classified their vehicles as light trucks, which are not eligible for the subsidy [4] - The Bureau has initiated a recovery process, mandating the return of the funds by a specified deadline to avoid legal consequences [4][6] Group 2 - The Bureau's announcement was later deleted, but officials confirmed that the content remains valid and that efforts are underway to communicate with the affected applicants [6] - Legal experts indicated that refusal to return the funds could lead to claims of unjust enrichment and potential administrative or criminal penalties for the recipients [6]