因代理销售安徽亳州的九州通中药物流园，范先生被拖欠了保证金及佣金一千多万元。数年过去，他仍 未要回这笔钱。 近日，范先生向智通财经反映称，在与亳州九州通中药物流产业投资有限公司（以下简称 "亳州九州通 公司"）合作时，他曾向该公司借款500万元。事后，亳州九州通公司的上属公司要求其归还500万元， 他认为亳州九州通公司拖欠其上千万元，二者应可以相互抵扣。 2023年10月，在前往武汉和亳州九州通公司上属公司方面沟通时，范先生被武汉汉阳区警方带走，后被 刑拘，其涉嫌的罪名是挪用资金罪。被羁押10个多月后，2024年9月，范先生被取保候审。 在范先生被带走前，亳州九州通公司总经理唐某某就已被抓。之后法院审理认定，唐某某犯职务侵占 罪、挪用资金罪，判处其有期徒刑5年。在唐某某的犯罪事实方面，其中之一便是唐某某违反公司资金 管理制度，擅自挪用公司资金500万元转账至范先生个人银行账户，用于个人投资及偿还债务。 目前，范先生涉嫌挪用资金罪一案正在检察院审查起诉阶段。范先生表示，他不是亳州九州通公司及其 上属公司的员工，和亳州九州通公司只是合作关系；上述500万属于借款，当时有写欠条，且亳州九州 通公司拖欠其上千万元，理 ...

（原标题：终审裁决！康得新犯欺诈发行证券罪，董事长获刑15年） 12月15日晚间，康得新公告了重大诉讼进展情况。 公告表示，公司于2025年12月11日收到江苏省高级人民法院的（2025）苏刑终17号《刑事裁定书》。江 苏省高级人民法院驳回上诉，维持原判。本裁定为终审裁定。 一审判决显示，康得新犯欺诈发行证券罪、骗购外汇罪，判处罚金人民币四亿一千万元。康得新董事长 钟玉犯欺诈发行证券罪等，被决定执行有期徒刑十五年，并处罚金人民币二千零二十万元。 犯欺诈发行证券罪 判决书显示，本案中，被告人钟玉作为康得新公司的董事长、实际控制人，与被告人徐曙、王瑜等人共 谋，安排公司相关人员分层部署、全链条配合的系统化财务造假行为，长达七年之久，造假金额巨大， 严重扰乱证券市场秩序，依法应当从严惩处。 综上，对被告单位康得新公司、被告人钟玉、徐曙、王瑜、张丽雄及其他非公司相关人员依照1997年修 订的《中华人民共和国刑法》第一百六十条、第二百七十二条第一款、经2006年《中华人民共和国刑法 修正案(六)》修订的《中华人民共和国刑法》第一百六十一条、《中华人民共和国刑法》第十二条、第 一百六十九条之一第一款、第二款、第六十七条、 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the significant legal developments regarding Kangde Xin, including a final ruling by the Jiangsu Provincial High People's Court, which upheld the original judgment against the company and its executives for serious financial crimes, including fraud and foreign exchange violations [1][6]. Summary by Sections Legal Proceedings - On December 11, 2025, Kangde Xin received a criminal ruling from the Jiangsu Provincial High People's Court, which rejected the appeal and upheld the original verdict [1]. - The first-instance judgment indicated that Kangde Xin was guilty of fraudulently issuing securities and illegally obtaining foreign exchange, resulting in a fine of RMB 410 million [2]. Sentences for Executives - Chairman Zhong Yu was sentenced to 15 years in prison and fined RMB 20.2 million for multiple offenses, including fraud and foreign exchange violations [3]. - Other executives, including Xu Shu and Wang Yu, received varying sentences ranging from 2.5 years to 6.5 years, along with fines for their roles in the fraudulent activities [4]. Financial Impact - The total fine of RMB 410 million represents 3.29% of Kangde Xin's most recent audited net assets, and the company has already accounted for this penalty in its financial statements, indicating no impact on current or future profits [6]. Case Timeline - The case has spanned over four years, beginning with the initial indictment in September 2021, leading to various legal proceedings and the final ruling in December 2025 [7].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the sentencing of a senior executive from Datang Wealth, a key wealth management platform under the Zhongzhi Group, for illegal public deposit absorption, marking the first criminal conviction in the Zhongzhi case following the group's financial collapse [3][6][9]. Group 1: Zhongzhi Group Overview - Zhongzhi Group was once a large conglomerate with assets exceeding 1 trillion yuan, holding stakes in various licensed financial institutions and asset management companies [9]. - Following its financial troubles, the group faces liabilities exceeding 420 billion yuan, affecting nearly 5,000 corporate clients and numerous individual investors [9]. Group 2: Legal Proceedings and Sentencing - The executive, referred to as Yu, was sentenced to three years and five months in prison and fined 200,000 yuan for illegally absorbing public deposits, with the court noting the significant social harm of his actions [3][10]. - Yu's team sold 2.07 billion yuan in financial products over five years, primarily to cover internal funding gaps within the Zhongzhi Group, with 410 million yuan in principal remaining unpaid [5][9]. Group 3: Implications for Other Cases - The sentencing of Yu is seen as a precedent for similar financial crime cases, raising questions about the potential sentencing of executives from the Evergrande Group, which is also facing severe legal scrutiny [7][19]. - The article highlights the ongoing investigations into the Evergrande Group, with its founder Xu Jiayin facing multiple charges, including illegal fundraising exceeding 400 billion yuan [13][19]. Group 4: Family and Inheritance Issues - The late founder of Zhongzhi, Jie Zhikuan, left behind a significant estate, but his widow chose to renounce her inheritance, thereby avoiding liability for the group's debts [17]. - Jie’s family members may face financial repercussions due to their ties to the group, as the company undergoes bankruptcy proceedings [17][18].

Core Viewpoint - The actual controller of Beiliang Company, Ma Xuejun, has been found to have occupied company funds through various means, raising concerns about financial transparency and governance [1][4][5]. Group 1: Fund Occupation Details - From October 2021 to the end of 2022, Ma Xuejun occupied a total of 408,230 yuan through employee loans [1]. - Additionally, the company made advance payments totaling 8 million yuan to a supplier, which were later identified as funds occupied by Ma Xuejun [3]. - The occupied funds have been returned, but the interest accrued remains a concern for regulatory compliance [4]. Group 2: Regulatory Implications - The occupation of funds by the major shareholder may lead to regulatory penalties, as it constitutes a violation of information disclosure obligations [4][5]. - Legal experts indicate that the actions could potentially violate securities laws and may result in criminal charges if certain conditions are met [5][6]. Group 3: Company Financial Performance - Beiliang Company has reported continuous losses over the past three years, with revenues of 895 million yuan, 1.275 billion yuan, and 1.085 billion yuan from 2022 to 2024, respectively [7]. - The net profit figures for the same period were -124 million yuan, -50.24 million yuan, and 1.019 million yuan, indicating a lack of significant recovery [7]. - High sales expenses have been a persistent issue, with sales expenses reaching 482 million yuan, 680 million yuan, and 544 million yuan, leading to high sales expense ratios [9]. Group 4: Market Position and Strategy - The company primarily relies on direct sales and has established a significant presence in physical retail locations, which incurs high fixed costs [11]. - The product category is characterized as non-essential, leading to reliance on promotional activities to drive sales, which further increases marketing costs [11]. - There is potential for improvement in sales efficiency and cost management, but the company is currently in an expansion phase that necessitates high marketing expenditures [11].