南都讯记者刘嫚发自北京一职业索赔人在餐馆就餐时，多次投放异物并以此要挟商家，要求免单和索 赔，共索得钱款1663元，被法院以敲诈勒索罪判处有期徒刑六个月，缓刑一年。 审理法院认为，被告人苏某以非法占有为目的，多次勒索他人财物，其行为已构成敲诈勒索罪。根据 《最高人民法院、最高人民检察院关于办理敲诈勒索刑事案件适用法律若干问题的解释》（法释 〔2013〕10号）第二条规定，一年内曾因敲诈勒索受过行政处罚的，敲诈勒索公私财物"数额较大"的标 准可以按照该司法解释第一条规定标准的百分之五十确定。苏某2024年1月曾因敲诈勒索被行政拘留， 本案敲诈勒索他人财物1663元，可认定为数额较大。苏某到案后认罪悔罪，退赔被害单位全部经济损失 并取得部分被害单位谅解，依法可以从轻处罚。鉴于苏某犯罪情节较轻，没有再犯罪的危险，宣告缓刑 对所居住社区没有重大不良影响，可依法对其宣告缓刑。据此，以敲诈勒索罪判处被告人苏某有期徒刑 六个月，缓刑一年，并处罚金人民币三千元。 最高法等三部门表示，餐饮业与人民群众日常生活密切相关，是促消费、惠民生、稳就业的重要领域。 推动餐饮业高质量发展，既要坚守食品安全底线、提升餐饮服务品质，也要优化餐 ...

近年来，违法索赔犯罪手段不断翻新，部分不法人员瞄准特定商家，虚构商品交易及商品质量问题，骗 取侵占钱财。 一起案例中，电商经营者黄某等人组织他人，通过伪造买家快递单和食品包装袋胀袋、漏气视频、照片 等方式，在网络平台上虚构某食品公司生产的鸡爪存在食品质量问题，骗取该公司退款共计9万余元。 黄某最终被判处有期徒刑三年三个月，并处罚金人民币五千元，其余被告人根据其犯罪情节处以不等刑 罚。 （文章来源：新华社） 最高人民法院、最高人民检察院、国家市场监督管理总局1月29日联合发布5件规范职业索赔维护市场秩 序典型案例，警示以职业索赔为业者守法守规、诚信交易，维护良好营商环境和市场秩序。 近年来，一些职业索赔人滥用投诉、举报、诉讼等维权途径，利用"退一赔十""退一赔三"等法律制度， 达到高额索赔目的，甚至为获取非法利益，恶意制造违法生产经营假象，实施敲诈勒索、诈骗等违法犯 罪行为，扰乱市场交易秩序，损害生产经营者合法权益。 这批案例中，有的在多家餐馆就餐期间，将事先准备的蟑螂投入饭菜，5次向餐馆要求免单和索要赔 偿，其中4次索得钱款共计1663元；有的流窜多省超市、咖啡店等场所，用钢针扎破食品包装袋并塞入 毛发或钢丝 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the increasing prevalence of malicious claims against e-commerce brands, particularly focusing on the case of Fan Beauty Diary, which faced multiple fraudulent compensation requests from a university student, highlighting the tactics used by professional claimants to exploit businesses [4][5][20]. Group 1: Case Study of Fan Beauty Diary - Fan Beauty Diary reported a malicious claim involving a university student who falsely alleged that a face mask contained foreign objects, seeking over 11,000 yuan in compensation [4][7]. - The brand's investigation revealed that the student's claims were fabricated, as the opening video showed signs of tampering, allowing for the insertion of foreign objects [10][11]. - The total amount claimed by the student across multiple incidents reached 24,735.3 yuan, indicating a pattern of fraudulent behavior [13]. Group 2: Broader Implications for E-commerce - Many businesses, like Fan Beauty Diary, are increasingly targeted by professional claimants who exploit legal loopholes and consumer protection laws to demand compensation [15][18]. - The article outlines how these claimants often choose small to mid-sized businesses, leveraging their lack of legal knowledge and fear of negative publicity to extract payments [18]. - The current regulatory framework is criticized for being vague, making it difficult for businesses to defend against such claims, leading many to opt for settlement rather than legal action [18][20]. Group 3: Changes in Legal and Platform Responses - Recent trends indicate a shift in judicial attitudes towards professional claimants, with courts becoming more stringent in evaluating the legitimacy of claims [20][21]. - E-commerce platforms are also evolving their policies to better protect businesses, such as implementing new models to identify and block fraudulent orders [21][22]. - Businesses are encouraged to adopt proactive measures, including thorough documentation and evidence collection, to defend against malicious claims and to collaborate with industry peers to share information on fraudulent tactics [22][23].

Core Viewpoint - The phenomenon of professional claims under the guise of "fighting counterfeits" is disrupting normal market order and consuming limited administrative and judicial resources, necessitating a clear distinction between legitimate claims and malicious ones [1][4][5] Group 1: Regulatory Challenges - Professional claimants often exploit a systematic approach involving purchase, complaint, public disclosure, petition, administrative review, and litigation, which pressures the regulatory framework [2] - There is a lack of clarity in the boundaries of regulatory enforcement against claims, with inconsistent standards across regions and insufficient inter-departmental collaboration [2] - The shift of professional claims from offline to online platforms has led to a more specialized and industrialized approach, complicating the enforcement of consumer rights [2][3] Group 2: Impact on Businesses - Companies frequently choose to settle claims to avoid lengthy legal processes, even when they may ultimately win in court, which can still damage their reputation [3] - The prevalence of false accusations can undermine consumer trust in businesses and the industry as a whole [3] - There is a need for businesses to enhance compliance and responsibility awareness to mitigate the risks associated with professional claims [4][5] Group 3: Recommendations for Improvement - It is essential to categorize and address claims based on their nature, employing targeted strategies to manage the issue effectively [4] - Legislative and regulatory bodies, along with businesses and platforms, must work together to create a coherent framework for managing professional claims [4][5] - Implementing a robust reward mechanism for legitimate reporting and enhancing the integrity of business practices are crucial steps in addressing the challenges posed by professional claims [3][4]