Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the legal case involving Zhai Xinxin, who was sentenced to 12 years in prison for extortion, which led to the suicide of her ex-husband Su Xiangmao. The case highlights issues of domestic abuse, financial manipulation, and the consequences of coercive relationships [1][28][37]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - On September 19, 2025, the Beijing Haidian District People's Court sentenced Zhai Xinxin to 12 years in prison for extortion and imposed a fine of 100,000 RMB, along with compensation of over 70,000 RMB to the plaintiffs [1][28][38]. - The court found that Zhai Xinxin's actions constituted extortion, as she threatened to report her ex-husband for tax evasion and illegal business practices unless he paid her 10 million RMB and transferred property to her [28][37]. Group 2: Background of the Individuals Involved - Su Xiangmao, the victim, was the founder of WePhone and had a history of financial success, which made him a target for Zhai Xinxin's manipulative tactics [3][24]. - Zhai Xinxin, born in 1986, was perceived as a "good student" and had a stable academic background, which contrasts sharply with her later criminal behavior [11][13][19]. Group 3: Relationship Dynamics - The relationship between Su Xiangmao and Zhai Xinxin began in March 2017, leading to a marriage that lasted only 42 days before Zhai initiated divorce proceedings under threats [36][37]. - Zhai Xinxin's demands included a significant financial settlement and property transfer, which Su Xiangmao could not meet, leading to his tragic decision to take his own life [24][27][37]. Group 4: Aftermath and Public Reaction - Following Su Xiangmao's death, his family accused Zhai Xinxin of fraud and extortion, leading to legal actions against her [29][30]. - The case has drawn significant media attention, raising awareness about the dangers of financial abuse and coercive relationships [3][24][33].

Core Viewpoint - A recent case in Linyi City, Shandong Province, involved a suspect named Zhang who extorted money from multiple small restaurants by falsely claiming to have found foreign objects in their food, leading to a total of over 5000 yuan in extorted amounts [1][19]. Group 1: Incident Overview - Four restaurant owners reported incidents of extortion to the police, claiming a customer demanded high medical compensation after alleging they found glass shards and toothpicks in their takeout orders [2][14]. - The suspect targeted small to medium-sized restaurants, exploiting their fear of negative reviews and reputational damage to extract payments without verifying the claims [14][16]. Group 2: Investigation and Arrest - Police investigation revealed that the complaints shared similar details, indicating they were orchestrated by the same individual, leading to the identification of Zhang as the suspect [15][16]. - Zhang was apprehended on the evening of July 30, and during interrogation, he admitted to fabricating the claims of foreign objects in food to carry out the extortion [17][18]. Group 3: Extortion Methodology - Zhang's method involved injuring himself and creating fake medical documentation to support his claims, which he used to intimidate restaurant owners into paying him off [18]. - He had previously received compensation for a similar incident, which inspired him to pursue this scheme against multiple restaurants [18].

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing legal dispute between Ankao Zhidian and its former secretary Huang Jiegen has reached a significant milestone with Huang being convicted of extortion, which he plans to appeal. The case highlights the complexities surrounding allegations of financial misconduct and the challenges of corporate governance in the Chinese market [1][2][3]. Group 1: Background of the Case - The conflict began in August 2022 when Huang questioned the authenticity of Ankao Zhidian's financial reports and refused to sign them, leading to accusations of extortion during negotiations for performance-based stock rewards [1][6][12]. - Huang's allegations of financial fraud were based on discrepancies in the company's reported profits, which he believed were inflated through premature revenue recognition [13][15][16]. Group 2: Legal Proceedings - Huang was arrested on July 28, 2023, during a court hearing related to his administrative lawsuit against the regulatory bodies for not investigating the alleged financial fraud [2][3]. - The court's ruling on August 11, 2023, found Huang guilty of extortion, with the sentence expected to be severe, although details remain undisclosed as he intends to appeal [1][4]. Group 3: Financial Allegations - Huang reported that Ankao Zhidian had inflated its profits by 44% in the 2021 semi-annual report and by 64.5% in the annual report, primarily through the early recognition of revenue from a project that had not yet generated actual income [15][16]. - The company’s financial performance has deteriorated significantly, with its stock price dropping by 60% since its peak in November 2021, reflecting a loss of investor confidence [24]. Group 4: Company and Industry Impact - Ankao Zhidian, which specializes in cable connection systems and gas-insulated transmission systems, has faced severe scrutiny and regulatory actions due to the allegations of financial misconduct [12][16]. - The ongoing legal battle and the company's declining stock performance have led to a significant reduction in institutional investor holdings, from 15.3% to 2.1%, indicating a loss of market trust [24].

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing legal dispute between the listed company Ankao Zhidian and its former secretary Huang Jiegen has reached a significant milestone, with Huang being convicted of extortion, which he plans to appeal. The case highlights the complexities of corporate governance and financial integrity within the company [1][3]. Group 1: Background of the Dispute - The conflict began in August 2022 when Huang Jiegen questioned the authenticity of Ankao Zhidian's financial reports and refused to sign them, leading to accusations of extortion when he sought stock rewards as per a performance agreement [1][5]. - Huang's apprehension stemmed from concerns about potential retaliation for his insistence on truthful reporting, prompting him to submit a written opinion indicating he could not guarantee the accuracy of the financial statements [8][9]. - The performance agreement stipulated that Huang would receive stock rewards contingent on the company's market value meeting specific targets over three years, alongside commitments to maintain a minimum profit growth [9][10]. Group 2: Financial Misconduct Allegations - Huang raised alarms about potential financial misconduct after noticing discrepancies in the company's profit figures across different versions of financial reports, leading him to suspect that profits were artificially inflated [17][21]. - He reported that the company had prematurely recognized revenue from a project, which he believed had not generated any actual income, resulting in significant profit inflation in the financial statements [19][21]. - Huang filed multiple complaints with the China Securities Regulatory Commission regarding the alleged financial fraud, but the regulatory response was limited, leading to dissatisfaction with the outcomes [22][23]. Group 3: Legal Proceedings and Outcomes - The legal proceedings have been marked by delays and conflicting narratives from both parties, with Huang portraying himself as a whistleblower while the company accused him of premeditated extortion [1][23]. - The court's ruling on Huang's conviction for extortion has raised questions about the nature of his demands, which he argues were legitimate claims for owed compensation rather than illegal extortion [5][26]. - The case reflects broader issues of corporate governance, accountability, and the protection of whistleblowers in the financial sector, with implications for investor confidence in Ankao Zhidian [27][30].

Group 1 - The article reports on the prosecution of 21 members of the Bai family crime group, which has been involved in telecom network fraud targeting Chinese citizens [1] - The key figures in the crime group, Bai Suocheng and Bai Yingcang, are highlighted as primary suspects in various serious crimes including fraud, operating illegal gambling, extortion, intentional homicide, intentional injury, kidnapping, and drug-related offenses [1]