Chapter 13 Whole Story of Hearing Yang Bin Case

Yang Bin Focused again by Media
On November 26, 2002, Yang Bin was arrested officially. On the next day Xinhua News Agency release reports: on November 27, Yang Bin was arrested by the local public security authority officially for “being suspected of being involved in fictitious investment, bribery, contractual fraud, and illegal occupation of agricultural land”. At the beginning, Yang Bin was put in Shenyang’s prison, and then transferred to one detention house in Qinhuangdao where it’s said some officials who violated laws served sentences there. Li Ye, deputy director-general of State Land and Resources Department of Liaoning Province, and Du Shoufang, director-general of State Land and Resources Bureau of Shenyang City were also taken into custody there.
Yang Bin was still treated very well there. Yang Fenglin, Aunt IV of Yang told me that there was only one 11-inch black and white TV in Yang’s prison, and Yang requested to change it into color TV. Tenders reported it to the leaders and got reply that there was no color TV there but they allowed Yang’s family to bring or buy one on Yang’s account. Finally Yang contributed money to buy one 21-inch color TV and share it with other prisoners. Yang Bin bought “555” cigarettes with his money. That’s to say Chinese police treated him very well. Yang was kept at Benxi Detention House, Liaoning before the judgment.
North Korean government knew the news in the shortest time that Yang Bin was summonsed for interrogation, and then they took the initiative to express to China that “they hoped China would treat Yang Bin well” through diplomatic channel ①. After that, the news came that Yang Hyong-sop, vice-chairman of the Supreme Congress of Democratic People's Republic of Korea visited Beijing. Yang Hyong-sop knew Yang Bin and believed that he would convey North Korean concern to Yang Bin through Chinese government during his visit to China. ②
From that on, foreign media released news of “Chief Executive of Sinuiju Special Administrative Region had been changed”, but we never heard so far that North Korean Congress’s resolution on withdrawing Yang Bin’s post. Though North Korean nuclear issue was always changeable, talks were held between three countries of North Korea, U.S. and China, North Korea never announced the fact that they gave up Sinuiju plan and the post of Yang Bin as Chief Executive of Sinuiju Special Administrative Region. At any rate, they were waiting for the day that “Yang Bin case” was clear.

[Photo: Some media reported that Ma Ning was appointed to be deputy Chief Executive of Sinuiju Special Administrative Region. The news was not totally misreported.: Ma Ning at Mt. Myohyang, North Korea. Photo was taken by Guan Shan]
Though North Korea never announced to withdraw Yang Bin’s post as the Chief Executive of Sinuiju Special Administrative Region, but Yang Bin was suspected of being involved in violating Chinese laws. It’s not practical that Yang would come back to take the office in Sinuiju Special Administrative Region immediately or soon. So did North Korea want to appoint another the Chief Executive of Sinuiju Special Administrative Region? According to the communication between officials from North Korean government and me, in my opinion, it’s impossible that North Korea would appoint second the Chief Executive of Sinuiju Special Administrative Region immediately. But it was more likely to appoint a deputy Chief Executive of Sinuiju Special Administrative Region. Moreover, as far as I knew, before North Korea would make “Yang Bin case” clear, they would always appoint a deputy Chief Executive of Sinuiju Special Administrative Region. Some media reported that Ma Ning became a deputy Chief Executive of SAR, and this news was not impossible. But as far as I observed that, Ma Ning was not the right person to be a deputy Chief Executive of SAR. It was not because he was not smart enough. Based on the communication with him for months (for years up to the end of 2007), the man was quick-minded and loyal to Yang Bin so he was outstanding among Yang’s consultants. But he lacked a background and reputation in business circle at home and abroad. So was North Korea thinking of other candidates for a deputy Chief Executive of SAR? They would be certainly and more carefully this time after they accepted some experiences and lessons. I thought, North Korea would not consider the South Korean, Hong Kong man or another who were reported by media. It’s said that after “Yang Bin case” became clear, North Korea would appoint temporarily Gui Shenghai, No.1 vice-chairman of Foreign Economic Cooperation & Promotion Committee of North Korea as a deputy Chief Executive of SAR and select one assistant among Yang Bin’s consultants to continue to carry out the plan of Sinuiju Special Administrative Region.
On January 22, 2003, Kyung Hyang Ilbo of South Korea bursted out a news about Sinuiju of North Korea stating that: “It’s reported from reliable sources that He Hongzhang, who was in charge of Hedong Trust Fund had made investment in Pyongyang, and he will be appointed as the new Chief Executive on the birthday of Kim Jong II, the leader of North Korea on February 16.”
Once the news was released, media from Hong Kong, Singapore and Japan forwarded it one after one.
He Hongzhang was the first grandson of He Dong, the richest in Hong Kong in 1940s, as well as one of cousins of He Hongshen. He Dong family enjoyed high influential status among Hong Kong and Macao and played an important role in politics and business circles. He Hongzhang, 74-year old this year, had studied abroad and engaged in finance, real estate investment in Hong Kong and enjoyed good reputation worldwide.
On that day, in Beijing I received calls from several reporters from home and abroad asking about the news and my opinions. I went to Yanggakdo Hostel with Yang Bin several times where the underground floor was full of entertainment and catering businesses opened by He Hongshen. I knew He family had established good business relations with Pyongyang. But it’s impossible to presume North Korea might appoint one of He family members as the new Chief Executive of Sinuiju. There were complex relations and North Korean standard etc. Moreover, Yang Bin case was not made clear so far.
Feng Weiguang, the spokesman of He Hongzhang in Hong Kong denied the news as expected. He stated: “He Hongzhang denied the report. He said he kept in contact with North Korea for the sake of focusing on charity and any concerned it.”
Meanwhile, the North Korean consul in Hong Kong also denied the report and stated that the candidate of the Chief Executive of Sinuiju was still pending.
Since Yang Bin was arrested by Shenyang police, Holland Village which used to be busy and crowded became quite still as dead water. I lived there until October 28 2002 and left when it’s too cold to live for no money used for coals. Windmills, the most typical landmark at Holland Village were still rotating slowly along cold wind. When the spring was coming, I visited Holland Village again, stood by windmills, and I saw they could not rotate any more. Everything there was ceased and none of employees were there as they could receive wages for months and had to leave there for making a living otherwise. Tens of suites of commercial buildings were sold there previously. I didn’t know how residents living there spent the frozen winter. There were hundreds of white and black swans there which were still taken care of workers for the sake of Aunt IV Yang. It’s a pity that hundreds of fancy carps introduced from Japan were gone.
By the middle ten days of May, 2003, I was working on revision of the book in Japanese version named “Yang Bin as Far as I know”. Friends told me Yang Bin case would be heard in Shenyang court on June 10 or 11. Tian Wenchang, counsel for the defense for Yang Bin and his team arrived Holland Village beforehand. Friends hoped me to audit in the trial and gave me one copy of “Letter of Proposal for Prosecution of Shenyang Municipal Public Security Bureau – No. SGJSZ [2003]16” for reference.
I had heard that Yang Bin case was listed No. 803 as one of big cases by Liaoning Province early. It’s said “No. 803 working team” was consisted of Wang Qiwen, deputy secretary of Shenyang Municipal Committee of CPC (and secretary of Shenyang Municipal Commission for Disciplinary Inspection) and Li Baoquan, the deputy mayor who had acquired more than 500 evidences and 27 books of files.
On June 12, 2003, Shenyang Municipal Intermediate Court of Liaoning Province held a hearing on Yang Bin case for the first time. When the news was released, Xu Xun, from Hong Kong Commercial Daily released his report followed by South China Morning Post, Hankook Ilbo and other media from home and abroad. The news was posted in Internet and resulted in busy discussion and high attention from the public.
It’s said that Letter of Proposal for Prosecution from Shenyang pointed out Yang Bin was suspected of being involved in criminal fact classified into six items: I. Suspicion of fictitious investment; II. Suspicion of illegal occupation of agricultural land; III. Suspicion of contractual fraud; IV. Suspicion of forging financial document; V. Suspicion of bribery to the units; VI. Suspicion of units bribery.
The No.3 and No.5 items of accusations were caused by “the problem of land balance of Euro-Asia Group by mean of fictitious land”, so as to result in being suspected of being involved in “fictitious contracts and bribery”.
Introduction is made hereby to related content in order to allow readers to know the six items of accusations better:
I. Fictitious investment
Yang Bin established a joint venture named Shenyang Euro-Asia Industries Co., Ltd with Shenyang Liangma Group and Northeastern Company of China Agricultural Houses, Shenyang Hague hotel and Shenyang Holland Village Housing Development Co., Ltd. with Shenyang Wanbo Commerce Co., Ltd. and Beiling Housing Development Co., Ltd. and a solely owned company called Shenyang Euro-Asia Greenhouse Co., Ltd. and Shenyang Euro-Asia International Consultancy Co., Ltd. in the name of legal representative of Euro-Asia International Import & Export Trade Company on April 22 1998, as well as he was issued with Business License by Industrial and Commercial authority. US$15.83 million was stated as total registered capital of the above four companies but paid up capital was zero. From July 23 2001 to August 9, Yang embezzled fund from foreign currency account of the listed company in Shenyang and entered into the accounts of the above four companies as paid up capital in the name of the chairman of the board of directors of Euro-Asia Agriculture (Holding) Co., Ltd. All funds were transferred immediately.
II. Illegal occupation of agricultural land
On September 25, 1998, Yang submitted an application for land use to Yuhong District Government of Shenyang in the name of building high-tech agricultural demonstration zone project by Euro-Asia Industries Company. He requisitioned 121.5150 hectares land at Xiaohan Village, Beiling Town. On December 28, Liaoning Provincial replied and approved the land (No.LZDZ [1998]598) as high-tech agricultural demonstration zone. After Yang acquired the land use right, he neither went through formalities of transferring land use of agricultural land, nor fulfilled assignment procedures of land use right, or even paid related charges for changing land use. He used the land for building houses, villas, tennis houses and hotels and other non-agricultural construction on the land of 41.0176 hectares (2815.264mu) instead of high-tech agricultural demonstration zone.
On May 1 and September 12, 2001, Yang signed land leasing agreements on the lands of 16.024 hectares（240.36 mu）and 2 hectares（30 mu）with Bajiazi Village, Beijing Town, Yuhong District, Shenyang in the name of Euro-Asia Industries Company. Without approval from land administration authorities, Yang had built parking space (or rather municipal bus parking space ---noted by the writer) and gas station on a land of 3.4334 hectares（51.501 mu）among the above lands.
III. Contractual fraud
In May 2000, Yang Bin escaped from the regulation of “balance land” of Article 31 of Land Management Law. He assigned Mr. Zhang, one of staff of Liaoning Provincial Land Resources Department through Li Ye, the deputy director-general there, to find another farmland that built by others to offset the land used by Euro-Asia Industries. He promised to give RMB 1 million Yuans to the Land Management Bureau of Faku County. Mr. Hu, director-general of the Land Management Bureau of Faku Town instructed the director of Land Management Branch of Woniushi Town to select one land (over 1600 mu) which was not listed into cadastral management by the nation but cultivated by the local farmers at Weizigou for development the barren waste. Yang Bin drew up Barren Waste Development Use Agreement and Instruction Barren Waste of Weizigou, Woniushi Town, Faku County in the name of Euro-Asia Industries. The Land Management Bureau of the county approved and stamped their seal on the above agreements. In October 2000, Yang Bin signed Farmland Acquisition Agreement with the Land Arrangement Center of Liaoning Province on behalf of Euro-Asia Industries. He cheated and acquired RMB3.166 million Yuans as farmland development charge by fictitious development on the farmland of 1634.8895 mu (208.9926 hectares).
VI. Forging financial bills and notes
In November 2001, Yang Bin used one self-made seal of financial institution, organized Sang Shuhua and other financial personnel to fill in financial bills and notes with fictitious incomes or expenses and total face amount up to RMB1.786 billion Yuans in order to be listed in Hong Kong in the name of Shenyang Euro-Asia Agriculture Company.
V. Bribing government unit
In May 2000, in order to escape from “balance land” (namely the national land policy of making up what occupied), Yang Bin discussed with Zhang Jiaxu, one of the staff of state land resource bureau of Liaoning Province on making fictitious land. He turned to Hu Yuguang, the director-general of Land Management Bureau of Faku County for looking for one farmland that built by others pretended as the one that Euro-Asia Group planned to build. They marked it as barren waste in the drawing. The land covered about 1000 mu. Yang promised to pay RMB 1 million Yuans to the Land Management Bureau of the county for this reason. Yang Bin paid them RMB 1 million Yuans as scheduled by deducting RMB 20,000 Yuans as “service charge” to staff concerned. RMB0.98 million Yuans was paid to the Land Management Bureau of Faku County at twice.
IV. Bribing staff in government unit
In May 2000, Yang Bin gave RMB 250,000 Yuans to Zhang Jiaxu, one staff of Provincial Land Resource Bureau for his “contribution” on “balance land” in December. In order to express appreciation to Li Ye, the deputy director-general of Provincial Land Resource Department for his contribution on requisitioned land approval for Euro-Asia Group by five times, Yang Bin gave Li Ye US$ 20000 in the name of remuneration for Li’s son employment for German Euro-Asia Group. Li Ye returned back US$ 20000 to Yang Bin in August 2001, when his son came back to China.
Shenyang Public Security thought, Shenyang Euro-Asia Agriculture Development Co., Ltd. and Yang Bin’s conducts had violated Article 159, 342, 224, 177, 391 and 393 of Criminal Law and Article 129 of Criminal Procedure Law of China, suit was brought against them in accordance with laws.
According to the analysis of law experts, among the six crimes, the No.4 of “being suspected of being involved in counterfeiting financial bills and notes” was comparatively more serious. According to the regulations of Article 177 of Criminal Law, the one with confirmed crime was generally sentenced with fixed term imprisonment below five years or detention up to life imprisonment above 10 years together with fine amounting to between 50,000 and 500,000 Yuans or confiscation of property.
It’s said that the chief judge on Yang Bin case was Zhu Xiaoguang, associate chief judge of Secondary Criminal Court of Shenyang Intermediate Court. One of public prosecutor was He Wenwu, division chief of Shenyang Municipal Procuratorate. During the session, Supreme People’s Court and Supreme People’s Procuratorate were believed to assign staff to audit in Shenyang court.
It’s said that embassy of Holland assigned their staff to audit in Yang Bin case during session hearing.
On June 10, Chinese government also made response to the case. Kong Quan, the spokesman of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China indicated on the routine press release conference on 10 that China would hear the case in accordance with laws “based on facts and guided by laws”.
At the moment, Yang Bin stayed at detention house of Benxi City, Liaoning Province. Tian Yudong, the reporter from China Business Post visited Benxi detention house on June 2. He wrote: “Our car passed over the small downtown and bumped along the rough disrepaired highways in mining area. Benxi was famous for coals and steels and Wen Jiabao, the Prime Minister visited here days ago. All architectures along both side of road were coated with a layer of ash. The roads became smaller and smaller but pits became bigger and bigger. When our car drove over ‘’Bengang Refractory Materials Factory” smoking in black, we saw a brand of ‘Benxi City Public Security Supervision Team’ at the top of the hill with big slops.
“Ordinary appearance where you could see there was a small yard of about 300 to 400 m2 inside and only office building and national flag pole outside when walking along the yard wall.” At the watchtower in the corner of the yard, one armed police with gun in his arms was in inspection tour. When the sun was shining over the gate after noon, more and more people who came for visit were coming and going. One policeman on duty with slim body told reporters we were refused to visit Yang Bin in the name of 'Yang Bin’s friends’ until ‘he was put into prison.’”
I arrived in Shenyang in the evening of June 9, and arrived at A9 villa of Holland Village in the morning of the next day. I saw Yang Fenglin, Aunt IV, and she introduced me about Holland Village situation and lawyer appointment. At the noon, lawyers from Beijing arrived here, and we had lunch together. At that moment, I had seen those lawyers such as Tian Wenchang, Tian Di and Cao Shuchang for the first time. As they were from Beijing King & Capital Law Firm, it’s very easy for us to talk about Yang Bin case.
Lawyer Tian Wenchang was highly renowned among law circle. He was the director of Special Criminal Committee of China Lawyer Association as well as the chief defense counsel on those big cases such as Yu Zuomin Case Victims of Daqiuzhuang, Yunnan Li Jiating Case and Duan Xiaoxing Case, the bank director of Huaxia Bank. He was reputed as “No.1 Chinese criminal lawyer.”
Tian Wenchang, male, was born in 1947 in Fushun, Liaoning. When he was a child, he liked playing two-stringed Chinese fiddle and then turned to learn violin, so he was famous as “a young musician”. After that, he experienced all hardships during Cultural Revolution. Tian Wenchang became a teacher of one high school in mining areas after he returned to the city. When college entrance examination came back, Tian Wenchang was already 30-year old. He felt “too ashamed” if he could go to college with teenagers, so he made up his mind to take part in graduate examination. When he mentioned about this, he still said complacently: “I didn’t know where I got two books about law, and I started to learn them. After my waist was recovered, I took part in the examination of Graduate College of Northwest University of Politics & Law. He vomited in a complete mess so that examinees glanced at him when the first test was over. As a matter of fact, I was ranked No.1 among all examinees of the major.”
After graduation in LLM, Tian Wenchang went to China University of Political Science & Law as a teacher, then a deputy director of Law Department and a supervisor of graduate student, and finally he enjoyed reputation among law circle to a certain extent. In 1985, he started to work as a lawyer and set up King & Capital Law Firm in 1995. He was famous for being good at handling all kinds of typical difficult law affairs, so he succeeded in handling those important typical difficult cases from home and abroad such as the case of victim accusing against Yu Zuomin from Daqiuzhuang, Tianjin, the case of defense for impeccability on infringement of copyright of Zhuhai Jinleilian Laser Mainboard Making Co., Ltd., the case of dispute arbitration of Jie Er Yin trademark of Chengdu Enwei Group Co., Ltd.
In 1996, Tian Wenchang was appraised as one of “Top 10 Best Lawyers” in Beijing. In April, 1996, special interview with Tian Wenchang in two volumes was broadcasted with the subject on “Tian Wenchang, a lawyer from Beijing” by a program called “Dong Fang Zhi Zi” of CCTV in April.
He wrote works about laws such as Collection of Statements of Procurator & Defense from Famous Chinese Lawyers – Tian Wenchang and Criminal Action: Accusation, Defense & Interrogation – Talks between Zhang Jun, Qiang Wei and Tian Wenchang.
Lawyers stated that: Yang Bin case was not complex itself as public prosecution party accused against Yang Bin and his companies for only six crimes which could be divided into four items. Moreover, few companies and witnesses were involved in it. There were six defense counsels on Yang Bin case, of which two lawyers was a team, either of three team defended for Yang Bin, Euro-Asia Agriculture Company and Euro-Asia Industries Company respectively.
In the afternoon on 10, media and reporters from home and abroad received no news from the court and the procuratorate, so they all came to Holland Village one after one. They hoped to see Yang Bin’s family and lawyers before session, but they were refused by Yang’s family for the reason of “interview not accepted”.
Even before the session, any reporters could not see any lawyers from Beijing, as Tian Wenchang lived at Wanhao Hotel at downtown secretly and Cao Shuchang and Tian Di lived at D2 Villa of Holland Village. Any strange people could not approach to them.
Many reporters from home and abroad who were familiar with me arrived in Shenyang and called me via mobile phones. But I refused to disclose any messages that I knew for the reason of “I had not seen lawyers yet so far.” Therefore, when I went to Shenyang Intermediate Court with Yang Fenglin, Aunt IV of Yang Bin, those reporters complained me, especially O’Neal from South China Morning Post that we knew each other in Beijing, Xu Xun from Hong Kong Commercial Daily and Wang Lide from 21 Century Economic Report, and I had to apologize to them. Yang Bin’s family, Euro-Asia Agriculture and Euro-Asia Industries had only six audit cards. I was given one audit card by Yang Fenglin for the reason that I was Yang Bin’s biographer and we had gotten along with each other for over one year.
Oral Cross Swords between Lawyers at Court
At 8 am on June 11, I arrived at Shenyang Municipal Intermediate People’s Court along with Yang Bin’s family members and personnel from Euro-Asia Group. As it was the first session on Yang Bin case, it attracted attention worldwide. At the moment, it’s crowded with tens of media and reporters outside of the court. After I got off the car, I met O’Neal from South China Morning Post, reporters from UK Financial Times, Xu Xun from Hong Kong Commercial Daily, Lu Yinan from Oriental Daily and Wang Lide from 21 Century Economic Report, together with Business magazine, News Weekly, China Business Post, Economic Observer Online, Wuhan Chutian Metropolis Daily, Yonhap News Agency from South Korea, and other reporters form Japan and French TVs.
These women and men reporters with photo and video cameras in yellow and black hair were crowded along the gate of the Court and drew attention from Shenyang citizens who passed by. But Shenyang Municipal Public Security did not interfere and pretend them and their activities.
At that moment, the policemen were guarding strictly the front door, eastern and western doors of the Intermediate People’s Court. The front door was closed and only eastern door was opened for vehicles and people with permits.
At 8:20 am, reporter groups started to move as police wagons arrived in a hurry. The first one was one police-applied car. By the middle there were two police-applied station wagons. All wagon windows were covered by black sunproof films. The final one was also a police-applied car. Yang Bin came with those cars. They drove into the eastern door and alert reporters followed them with video cameras. Some reporters wanted to take photos by following those cars, but they were stopped by policemen politely. They saw through grill fence of the court the cars drove into backyard parking space of the court, and Yang Bin got off the car and taken into the building from the backyard passage by the court policemen.
At 8:30 am, Yang Fenglin called me. I put on the audit card at the chest and followed them into the eastern door of Shenyang Municipal Intermediate People’s Court. At this moment, reporters knew Yang Fenglin was one of Yang Bin family members, and they aimed at us with video cameras and recorded the scene that we walked into Intermediate People’s Court. Afterwards, Phoenix TV broadcasted those scenes when they introduced the session on Yang Bin case was held at Shenyang Municipal Intermediate People’s Court.
In the morning of that day, several cases were heard at the court at the same time, so many people were queuing for coming into the court. The guards only saw the audit cards hung at the chest of the people and let them in without asking much about others or even passing through security inspection. Yang Bin case was heard at the No.11 court which covered only tens of square meters. Audit gallery was located at both sides in four rows either of which there were five or six seats. The final row had two more seats than those in front rows as it’s by the wall. I looked around it and saw audit gallery could hold about fifty people. It’s heard that forty audit cards were issued and ones must be seated in the designated position. The forty ones with cards included Yang Bin’s family members, Euro-Asia Group staff, two diplomats assigned respectively by Embassy of Holland and Consulate of Holland stationed in Shenyang, cadres from public security, procuratorate and judicial authorities of Liaoning Province and Shenyang City. It’s said staff of No.803 working team (Yang Bin case working team) also took part in it.
Audit gallery was opposite to and chief justice seats and judgment seats of the court. Front row by the left was public prosecution party – public prosecutor seats of Shenyang Municipal Procuratorate; front row by the right was the defense party – defense counsel seats of Yang Bin. The one-person seat by the front central over one meter away from the audit gallery was the seat of defendant, with which in parallel two-person seats were for defendant company.
At that moment, the lights were on inside the court. One video camera was standing by the right and another one was there at the back of audit gallery. Only CCTV and reporters form Xinhua News Agency were allowed to be present. The court did not accept any reporters from any media except for the above-mentioned.
I left audit gallery and went out for smoking. There was one row of seats for sitting in the passageway. At the moment, two court policemen took Yang Bin over and he was in good mind dressed in white T-shirt and flaxen trousers. When he saw him, he greeted to me. The policemen did not say anything but took him to the central door of No.11 court, and stop outside the door.
The session started soon. I walked into the No.11 court and sat down on my own seat among the left audit seats. Two diplomats including Situ Lanting from embassy of Holland were sitting in the same row with me but they were in audit seats by the right side. It took 3 days for the session, and they arrived at the court timely and listened to it quietly every day. At the moment, audit seats were full. Six public prosecutors entered in the court, including four men and two women sat on the prosecutor’s seats. Tian Wenchang and other lawyers also took their seats dressed in black lawyer clothes. Five men and one woman were seated on the defendant agency seats. Yang Fenglin and Bian Shoujie represented respectively Euro-Asia Agriculture and Euro-Asia Industries Company and sat on company defendant seats. The chief judges entered finally, and all stood up. Chief justice declared the session open and “take in defendant Yang Bin”.
At the moment, two photoflood lamps focused on the central door of the court. The door was opened, and Yang Bin came in and walked onto the defendant’s seat with two court policemen standing by both sides of him. Reporters from CCTV started tracking screening for the whole process.
During the session in the morning of the 11, the public prosecutors made presentation and witnesses made testimonies which were basically the same to the “Letter of Proposal for Prosecution of Shenyang Municipal Public Security Bureau” but witnesses’ testimonies added and shown on the screen with the projector! So I did not repeat these again here. Adjournment was required at the noon. When we talked out of Shenyang Municipal Intermediate People’s Court, we were crowded by a group of reporters form home and abroad with many questions coming up.
Situ Lanting was asked so closely by those reporters that he had to answer: “Yang Bin was dressed in white clothes and his health was very sound with good mind.”
Some reporters asked: “Will Yang Bin’s judgment be carried out upon legal procedures?”
Situ Lanting said: “according to my observation, they carry out it upon general legal procedures.”
The diplomats from Holland refused to answer further questions politely: “Sorry, sorry…” and then got out of them and entered into their cars.
I, Yang Fenling and company staff went to had lunch at the restaurant opposite to the Intermediate People’s Court opened by Shenyang Theater. Yang’s family reserved two tables there. We and Yang Bin’s family, classmates, company staff who did not attend the session had lunch together.
Reporters from domestic media also entered into the restaurant and had lunch at tables around us. Even some reporters came over and asked Yang Fenglin: “Are you Aunt IV of Yang Bin?” Yang Fenglin had to shake her head and say nothing, and the reporters had to leave.
In the afternoon, the court trial was focused on courtroom investigation on two crimes of being suspected of being involved in fictitious investment and illegal occupation of agricultural land raised by the public prosecutors. The public prosecutors showed to the court the minutes, pictures and films of witnesses’ testimonies. The public prosecutors and defendant’s lawyers started to debate on these. Yang Bin behaved quietly in the first day of the session. The whole court trial was carried out in order.
Regarding being suspected of being involved in fictitious investment, I was given the information about talks with Li Lianghui, the deputy director of Shenyang Municipal Urban and Township Construction Committee. He said: “In June 2001 or so, as I could not completed the assignment of introducing enough investments in the development zone, we all were anxious about it and turned to Yang Bin for his foreign fund. We asked him if he could help us introducing some foreign investment and completing our assignment. We discussed my thoughts with our team and said Yang wanted to assign some ones into the development zone who we were asked to register a company with US$10 million so as to complete our assignment. If he made it, we had to arrange the ones that he wanted to assign into the development zone. At that time, all team members agreed with it and took minutes.”
The court trial on the 11 lasted for 7 hours until the adjournment at 5:30 pm.
The court trial on the 12, courtroom investigation and evidence were made on the six crimes that Yang Bin and its companies being suspected of being involved in. the public prosecutors presented facts and processes of every crime and showed a lot of testimonies and certificates. Yang Bin and its defense counsels raised doubts over the trueness of the testimonies and pointed out that all witnesses did not appear in the court so far, the reliability of the testimonies lacked stringency, especially Yan Chang, the key person that the case concerned did not appear in the court which resulted in heavy defects objectively to the process of proof of the case.
On 13, prosecutor and defendant lawyers made the final presentation according to the legal procedure of the court trial.
Once the session was held in the morning on that day, defense counsels and Yang Bin denied all six accusations of the public prosecutors. Prosecutor and defendant lawyers debated fiercely on adducing evidence and cross-examination.
First of all, Tian Di and Ma Shuning from King & Capital Law Firm raised doubts to the crimes of being suspected of being involved in illegal occupation of agricultural land, contractual fraud, bribery to and for companies.
Brief introduction was made hereby to justification made by both lawyers:
Regarding illegal occupation of agricultural land.
Subjectively Euro-Asia Industries did not illegally use agricultural land intentionally but carried out instruction and spirit of the governments of all levels that non-agricultural construction was made on the state-owned land allocated by the provincial government.
I. High-tech agricultural demonstration zone was classified into the project of integrating “agriculture, tourism and real estate” and stated that “the construction project of Holland Village was going smoothly,” in the application document submitted to Liaoning Provincial government namely No.SZB [2000]8 of Shenyang Municipal People’s Government.
II. The memorandum of No.JTZBZ [2001]012 of Investment Office of Shenyang Municipal Planning Commission pointed out that “construction plan was made upon detailed research as follows: Euro-Asia Industries invested RMB1.25 billion Yuans totally in 570,000 sq.m. residential area of Holland Village newly built at Xiaohan Village, Beijing Town, Yuhong District with construction fund financed by themselves. The project was listed into the plan of 2001 housing development construction of the city.”
III. The summary of minutes of the mayor office meeting of No.BZEZ [2001]116 of Shenyang Municipal Government recorded that: “the meeting agreed the implementation of the project of residential area of Holland Village of Shenyang Holland Village Housing Development Co., Ltd. that newly built at Xiaohan Village, Beijing Town, Yuhong District.”
VI. Li Yuhua, the secretary of Yuhong District Committee proved that the chief leaders and the Municipal Government Meetings instructed all functional departments to fulfill “to approve it before all formalities that made up afterwards” on the Holland Village project; he proved that Yu Bo, the head of the district also made similar instruction to governmental functional departments.
V. Wan Shouhai, the ex-director general of Planning Bureau of Yuhong District also proved that he took part in workshops on Holland construction held by the Municipal Government and building permit was issued upon the spirit of the meetings.
VI. Du Shoufang, the director general of Planning Bureau of Yuhong District also proved that, leaders of higher authorities required functional departments to “turn on green lights” on all projects of Holland Village and carry out “simultaneous policy” (planning, building and making up formalities simultaneously, namely preferential policy granted by the provincial and municipal leaders — noted by the writer).
Objectively, Euro-Asia Industries requested several times the higher authorities for going through formalities of land use according to required legal regulations as soon as possible.
On January 1, 2000, Euro-Asia Industries was granted with the certificate for land use issued by the People’s Government of Yuhong District of Shenyang City in accordance with laws. The use of the certificate for land use was for integrated application. Importantly the certificate for land use was not withdrawn so far and still effective.
The contracts for assignment of land use right of No.STHZ [2001]28 was still legal and effective. According to the regulations of the contracts, Shenyang Municipal Planning Land Bureau assigned to Euro-Asia Industries a land of 329 079.8 m2 with RMB 41 973 272.9 Yuans. Euro-Asia Industries built residential areas upon the requirement of urban planning.
In March 2001, the certificate for land use issued by Shenyang Municipal Government to Euro-Asia Industries was legal and effective. Euro-Asia Industries could not pay land leasing fee timely for a certain reason. Before the contracts for assignment of land use right was signed, Shenyang Municipal Government owed Euro-Asia Industries city planning construction fee of RMB 79 million Yuans which was used for offsetting land leasing fee correspondingly instructed by Yuhong District and Shenyang City. But it could not be put into practice for dispute over trifles between functional departments.
If Euro-Asia Industries was determined to illegally obtain the certificate for land use for unpaid land leasing fee, it’s unreasonable to impose the responsibility that the governmental departments should take onto Euro-Asia Industries.
Regarding the construction of parking areas.
The summary of minutes of the mayor meeting of No.BWJZ [2000]70 of Shenyang Municipal government recorded: “the municipal planning bureau wanted to conduct overall planning design onto the construction of Holland Village station in view of promoting the development of Holland Village’s tourism.”
Du Shoufang's testimonies proved that, Li Yuhua, the secretary of Yuhong District Committee confirmed “to approve before formalities that could be made up afterwards” on the project of Holland Village at the site office meeting of Holland Village project held by the district government. The construction of parking areas was considered as the matter on land use coordinated between him and Bajiazi Village, Beiling Town, Yuhong District.
Regarding the construction of gas station.
Du Shoufang's testimonies proved that, the land occupied by gas station was determined by the Yuhong District government and “Li Yuhua confirmed to approve before formalities that could be made up afterwards on the project when he presided the site office meeting.”
Zhang Guangheng’s testimonies proved that, Du Shoufang coordinated the matter of the construction of gas station on the land rented by Euro-Asia Industries with Bajiazi Village and the Village Committee on behalf of the government.
To sum up, defenders thought, due to lack of acts of intentionally committing crime and objective crime, agricultural land illegally occupied by Euro-Asia Industries did not form constitutive elements of crime on illegal occupation of agricultural land crime stipulated by the criminal laws of China.
Regarding the contractual fraud.
Euro-Asia Industries did not use contractual fraud intentionally subjectively and conduct of contractual fraud objectively.
I. Background and Process of Barren Waste Development Agreement
Euro-Asia Industries needed to requisition land in Zaohua District, Shenyang upon the requirement of construction planning. According to the requirement of Li Ye, the deputy director-general of the provincial land department, land was requisitioned based on “balance land” which was realized by two ways, of which one was “to construct any land that occupied” and another one was “to pay any land development fee that occupied (namely purchase index)”. According to the advice of Li Ye, the deputy director-general, Euro-Asia Industries belonged to the latter one “purchase index”. The provincial land department assigned Zhang Jiaxu, the dean of farmland office to seek barren wastes for construction for Euro-Asia Industries. Yang Bin told Zhang Jiaxu, “the less money spent on the land construction, the better”, “money and labor were available during the construction”. All these could prove Shenyang Euro-Asia Industries aimed at paying construction fee and implementing “balance land” without illegal use others’ wealth subjectively.
The fact was: Zhang Jiaxu, the land bureau of Faku County and land office of Woniu Town and Weizigou consulted to plot and cheat construction fee from Euro-Asia Industries by faking land. But Euro-Asia Industries did not know anything all the time.
II. Background and Process of Reserve Farmland Purchase Agreement
Zhang Jiaxu found land in Faku County for Euro-Asia Industries Company which was accepted by the land arrangement center of Liaoning Province.
According to testimonies from Zhang Jiaxu, Li Zhi and Li Ye proved the fact, namely due to situation and policy change, the land under construction of “land balance” must be acquired into the provincial reserve bank. But Euro-Asia Industries could not expect the fact, and they refused to agree when Zhang Jiaxu asked to acquire the land from Euro-Asia Industries. Zhang Jiaxu proved “Yang Bin did not agree to it” and Yang Bin also proved Euro-Asia Industries did not agree to it too. As Euro-Asia Industries constructed land for the purpose of “balance land” but not for the money. But due to the regulation of the policy, Euro-Asia Industries had to allow Liaoning Provincial Land Arrangement Center to call back the land.
The defenders thought, there was no complete proofs to certify Shenyang Euro-Asia Industries Co., Ltd. was involved in contractual fraud.
Regarding the crimes of bribery to and for companies.
Zhang Jiaxu’s testimonies were inconsistent. First of all, he proved that RMB250,000 Yuans he received in check from Euro-Asia Industries was commission fee that his friends helped in the construction for Euro-Asia Industries, and then service charge that he was given after he found land for Euro-Asia Industries. Besides, as Zhang Jiaxu was a direct interested person of the case, his testimonies could not be accepted in view of evidence science.
According to the form and subject content paid by Euro-Asia Industries Company, together with Yang Bin’s testimonies, the above RMB250,000 Yuans was for service charge that he was given after he found land for Euro-Asia Industries.
(1) Euro-Asia Industries Company paid this fund in transfer check.
(2) “Earthworks” and “land-leveling operation” charge were reflected by the invoice provided by Zhang Jiaxu to Euro-Asia Industries Company, transfer check issued by Euro-Asia Industries and accounting vouches of Euro-Asia Industries. Therefore, it could prove that, the service charge for land paid by Euro-Asia Industries was retained by Zhang Jiaxu for his own use but not the fund that Euro-Asia Industries bribed to him.
Therefore, kindly request the court will give full consideration into the determination of the conduct.
Thank chief justice and judges!
After Tian Di and Ma Shuning defended for Euro-Asia Industries Company, Cao Shuchang of King & Capital Law Firm defended for the crimes that Yang Bin was suspected of being involved in by making a long presentation in the name of Tian Wenchang and him. They thought, “some facts of the case were clear enough”, but “must point out, there were defects in evidence, or inadequate evidence or wrong determination among the five accusations of crimes of fictitious investment, illegal occupation of agricultural land, contractual fraud, bribery to and for companies and counterfeiting financial bills and notes. Please attach high importance to related evidences and determination of the conduct nature among the above-indicated five crimes that involved in the case.”
The statement of defense of Cao Shuchang and Tian Wenchang were too long, so I did not repeat here as sum-up statement of defense of Tian Wenchang was referred hereinafter.
After that, the chief justice asked Yang Bin if he had something to say.
Yang Bin defended for himself. The following content was Yang Bin’s speech I took down with small papers as I saw many persons in audit gallery were taking minutes. But minutes could not be complete as sound recording only including some facts.
Self-defense Statement of Yang Bin ---
Regarding illegal occupation of agricultural land:
In October 2000, I sent to the leaders of housing team of the municipal government the report on building commercial houses stating that 400 mu land was used for developing commercial houses. The leaders agreed and approved my report for building commercial houses of 670,000 sq.m. architectural area.
The document of the land resource department was sent to the Liaoning Provincial Land & Resources Department in April 2002. Yang Xinhua (the current deputy governor of the province – noted by the writer) told me that, land used by Yang Bin was legal and “not handled as the one against laws” stated in the document. Li Ye (the deputy director general of Liaoning Provincial Land & Resources Department – noted by the writer) said in his oral confession that I asked him to alter “No.598 document”. In fact I did not. How could I ask him to alter the document from the land and resources department? The investigation made by some authorities was not true. Besides, Zhang Jiaxu’s oral confession on Mach 26 2003 was also not true.
Regarding Contractual Fraud
At the aspect, I was the victim and Zhang Jiaxu hid the facts. All oral confession of Zhang Jiaxu and others could prove that I had never participated in the process of “balance land” made on 1600 mu land in Faku County. Zhang Jiaxu was the participant and handler of the whole process. Zhang had two identities including one of cadres of the provincial land and resource department. He still took a part-time job in our Euro-Asia Industries Company for his own interest. During the negotiation of the land of Faku County, he participated in it with the identity of the official as well as I took part in it as the main body of the project was Euro-Asia Industries Company. Up to now, no evidences and oral confession could prove that I gave RMB 250,000 Yuans for performing “balance land” to Zhang Jiaxu. I am 40-year old this year, but I have never been to Faku County, and never met with Hu Yuguang of the land management bureau of the county. How could I know the land?
In addition, if it’s said I was involved in seal counterfeiting and contractual fraud, the contracts had to be signed attached with invoice (Euro-Asia Industries Company issued invoices to the land management land of Faku County for buying 1600 mu land) and seal (referred to the seal of the land management land of Faku County), there was the seal found in the evidences. I remind the court to look for the seal. Tools were required in committing a crime as if sword was needed in killing ones!
Regarding forging financial bills and notes:
It’s said Euro-Asia Industries Company made fictitious accounts for Arthur Andersen (audit organization of Euro-Asia Agriculture HKG0932 – noted by the writer). But Arthur Andersen never entered any agreement with Shenyang Euro-Asia Agriculture. Logically Euro-Asia Industries Company made fictitious accounts for Hong Kong Euro-Asia Agriculture. That’s to say we did it for ourselves.
Moreover, there were still some problems that I need to clarify. The program team (referred to No.803 working team – noted by the writer) investigated the accounts of Euro-Asia Agriculture before April 2002, and they thought Yang Bin did not take responsibility for subjective fictitious accounts. Why were there fictitious accounts after April 2002? At the moment, Yan Chang (the vice president and CFO of Euro-Asia Agriculture Company – noted by the writer) had been to U.S. for curing disease. Among the oral confession of everyone, it's “Yan Chang who asked them to make fictitious invoices”, therefore, it’s not me who asked them to do it. For these years, almost all county heads all over northern provinces visited Holland Village. If I need fictitious invoices, I only call them and buy from them as those could bring them taxes. I do not need to make fictitious invoices.
Yang Bin said: Yan Chang operated all actually, and I knew it after being listed. When I knew my financial staff made fictitious accounts and fictitious performance, I had to recognize it. My real thought was to fill in the holes in future time.
Liu Guifeng (vice-GM of Euro-Asia Agriculture Company – noted by the writer) made inconsistent oral confession. Now the public security bureau had investigated that she embezzled the fund of the company; Chen Jun also embezzled over 10 million Yuans. It’s me who reported them. In April 2002, Yan Chang gave me the dividend of Euro-Asia Agriculture amounting to over 100 million Yuans and I accepted it as the profit of the company. All these could show, I did not know well about the performance of Euro-Asia Agriculture, so I did not have subjective evidence to make fictitious account.
In the morning of 13, as Yang Bin and his lawyers denied all accusations of the public prosecutors, especially Tian Wenchang and several public prosecutors debated so fiercely that audience among the audit seats felt the defense party controlled the situation.
In the court, the chief justice did not interrupt the speeches of speakers unreasonably but gave enough time to prosecutor and defendant party and Yang Bin so that they could express their opinions and facts. The chief justice always controlled well the atmosphere and rhythm of the court.
By the noontime, political official of U.S. embassy came to the gate of Shenyang Municipal Intermediate People’s Court and attracted attention of reporters from home and abroad. Peoples asked him why he came here and made a lot of reports by guesses.
The afternoon of 13, was the final afternoon that Shenyang Municipal Intermediate People’s Court heard “Yang Bin case”, as well as the most wonderful and important part which attracted ones’ attention to the greatest extent. I was still sitting on the audit seat and took minutes as much as I can.
First of all, Yang Bin continued to make his own defense statements.
After that, the prosecuting party made sum-up debates by denouncing the viewpoints of Yang Bin and his defense counsels.
The key points of the crimes that prosecutors accused against Yang Bin and his companies were as follows:
The facts that fictitious investment was accused were clear enough. Yang Bin and his affiliated Euro-Asia Industries, Euro-Asia Agriculture and Euro-Asia International Consultancy were accused of the crime but not the difference of RMB 3.3 million Yuans; according to the principle of real capital, Yang Bin and his Euro-Asia International Trade Co., Ltd did not contribute registered currency capital as agreed in contracts and should take the responsibility for it as it resulted in failure to operate the companies: though Yang Bin used the embezzled capital in Holland Village, but this did not conform to legal procedure of registering companies. Therefore, the fund of Hong Kong, Beijing and Europe could not deny the crime.
Regarding the crime of bribery to companies and contractual fraud. In May 2000, Euro-Asia Industries and land management bureau of Faku County signed agreements in which RMB 0.98 million Yuans was agreed to be paid to land management bureau of Faku County at twice by April and September 2001. This amount was neither fee for constructing land nor fee for developing. Or even the content in the contracts was fictitious so it’s the money that Yang Bin bribed to the bureau; Yang Bin gave Zhang Jiaxu RMB 250000 Yuans. The fact was clear. Moreover, Yang Bin told him “money and labor were available only if the land was obtained.” Yang Bin signed in the contracts and it showed that Yang Bin knew this matter. Therefore, RMB 250000 Yuans should be determined as bribery money.

[Photo: Tian Wenchang, the director of Beijing King & Capital Law Firm who was praised as “No.1 lawyer of Chinese criminal cases”, acted as the chief lawyer who defended for Yang Bin.]
Regarding the issue of illegal occupation of agricultural land. The summary of minutes of Shenyang mayor office meetings on July 2 2001 showed that, the agricultural land used by Euro-Asia Industries illegally was instructed clearly by the provincial committee office of CPC that Euro-Asia Industries had to go through legal formalities before construction. The praise that provincial and municipal leaders made on Holland Village could not considered as the reason that Holland Village violated the regulations. Yang Xinhua (the current deputy governor of Liaoning Province) and Xu Wencai (the current deputy governor and the secretary of Shenyang Municipal Committee of CPC) also proved that, the government did not grant Holland Village the so-called “simultaneous policy”. The policy of “construction before formalities” given by Yuhong District government of Shenyang City was only available to express high way junction construction of secondary ring road of Shenyang City.
Regarding the crime of forging financial bills and notes. The conduct of counterfeiting fictitious financial bills harmed financial and banking order of China; Yang Bin was the principal of Euro-Asia Agriculture so he should be responsible for the trueness of his finance situation; during counterfeiting fictitious financial bills and notes, the testimonies of financial staff proved that they were abetted by Yang Bin to make fictitious seal, invoices and fictitious accounts for making fictitious certificates: though Yan Chang escaped to U.S., the final beneficiary of his conducts was Shenyang Euro-Asia Industries, so Yang Bin should take this responsibility
And then Tian Wenchang, the director of King & Capital Law Firm, made sum-up defense statements for Yang Bin.
Tian Wenchang, “No.1 lawyer of Chinese criminal cases” who had written many law works and teaching materials, behaved outstandingly in the court. Actually he had temperament and grace as a “scholar lawyer”. He spoke slowly as if he was giving lessons in college’s classroom. He explained profound statements and held powerful arguments in a simple way with his knowledge and wisdom. He analyzed and explored the facts and legal principles on Yang Bin case rationally with his thoughts, and he expressed his viewpoints in an objective and true way and made defense statements logically and humorously so that the audience among the audit seats laughed from time to time.
I saw afterwards the sum-up defense statements made by Mr. Tian could be considered as “supplement defense statements”, so the whole statements were recorded hereby for readers’ reference.
They were supplement defense statements (defense statements in second round court) on that Yang Bin was accused of the crimes of fictitious investment, illegal occupation of agricultural land, contractual fraud, counterfeiting financial bills and notes, bribery to and for companies.
Chief Justice & Collegial Bench:
In the first round of debates, Lawyer Cao Shuchang made overall presentation to the court on the overall submission of the six crimes that Yang Bin was accused by the public prosecutors of being suspected of being involved in. Now I will make brief supplements to the court on the focus problems of two rounds of debates between both parties. First of all, the defenders wanted to show to the court and the public prosecutors that during trials of any cases, there would be certainly divergence among the determination and analysis on some conducts between both parties due to different roles and angles of both parties. But the defenders think, notwithstanding, among any case, both parties have to follow the same fact, base on some evidences through mutual cross-examination and fulfill the same laws. Therefore, the defenders think, with evidence adduced and cross-examination to the facts and evidences made by both parties, together with analysis and studies on laws and regulations, all of us can raise our own viewpoints in an objective and true way through discussion and research so as to provide clear basis to the court. In my opinions, this is one of principles that I have to follow when I raise my own viewpoints. I would like to state detailed defense viewpoints to the court as follows:
I. About the Issue of Fictitious Investment
Regarding the crime of fictitious investment, I will not repeat the submission but talk about several supplement opinions now.
First of all, the defenders think, during evidence adduced and cross-examination on the crime of fictitious investment, there are something wrong to the contents and ways that prosecuting party adduced evidence and made cross-examination. The contents and ways that prosecuting party adduced evidence and made cross-examination shows that, the evidences could only reflect that accused companies transferred the fund. For example only some detailed process of the fund coming and going. The process only reflects the different forms that the funds are operated, and means nothing significant legally. As you all know, the operation of any funds depends on whether the fund could be useful to the operation of the enterprises and whether the enterprises could take corresponding legal responsibility. But it only serves as one of specific forms that the fund is operated but could not prove this issue.
It’s a pity that, during the evidences adduced by the prosecuting party, none of them could reflect the figure of difference between the total amount of invested capital and total amount of registered capital. The evidences adduced by the prosecuting party reflect only the idea that a lot of capitals were transferred without returning. According to the situation that the defending party knows actually, they are not true. The capitals that the defending party knows were transferred and returned but not without returning. Or else, it’s very difficult for us to explain the large Holland Village project that the prosecuting party presented by evidences from mediae. How could such a large project be built without foundation? Did it drop down from the heaven? We all witness the capital content was involved in the project. So how did these capitals come from? If the capitals are proved to be invested by others except for Yang Bin or his companies, we can say Yang Bin and his companies made fictitious investment. But we have never seen those evidences for proving it. Therefore, the defenders think, the evidences adduced could not tell the problem. When capitals were transferred one after one, the project of Holland Village was built. How did the capital of the project come from? How much were the total capitals in the investment? Everyone heard that when I asked Yang Bin during the courtroom investigation, he answered it. When I asked him his capital amount and total amount of invested capitals, everyone heard the answers of Yang Bin. The total amount of invested capitals that he said exceeded greatly than registered capital. Now as I did not investigate it, I do not have adequate condition to investigate these figures in details. But I could say at least, the prosecuting party could not show their evidences to prove total amount of invested capitals that Yang Bin invested were less than the total registered capital. Therefore, under the situation, how could he be determined as fictitious investment? What facts was “fictitious” investment based on? This is a very important problem.
Just now the public prosecutors mentioned one viewpoint that some capitals were transferred in from overseas afterwards. I did not understand it, and it seemed that these capitals could not be counted in the investment. So what defenders have to remind is that the original intention that laws stipulated on fictitious investment aims at ensuring the companies that investors set up could run normally and take legal responsibility in accordance with laws. What laws protect is this aspect, such as if the capital is transferred in and invested in scheduled projects as well as normal business. Therefore, we can say how the capital is transferred could not affect the formation of the crime. Capital resource problem is another legal relation. In view of the crime, when the companies have capital for project construction and take legal responsibility, fictitious investment does not exist. Though defect exists in the forms, the crime could not be determined through only the forms’ defect.
Yang Bin’s defense statements were very clear and profound after I listened to, so I do not repeat them here. But I think, his sincere and profound presentation could tell a problem: no matter whether the process of capital contribution violates laws, we could not find how the conduct harms the society? We could not see that.
Another problem that the defenders need to point out is that the public prosecutors may not notice that the chief problem reflected in the evidences of prosecuting party focuses on the problem of fictitious capital actually. The crime that whether capitals are placed in position or true is different from the crime of fictitious investment with different nature. Therefore, if defect exists in the forms of registered capital, the defenders do not deny it. But if it constitutes fictitious investment, the defenders think there are no evidences.
So the defect that exists in the forms of registered capital could not constitute a crime. For foreign invested companies, the requirement of all capitals is very flexible and loose. It allows three years and the project of Holland Village also did not exceed the period. How could it be determined as fictitious registered capital? The defenders raise this question for the reference of the court.
It’s known from the above-mentioned that, though it’s said defect exists in the forms of registered capital, it's unfair to determine Yang Bin and his companies have committed the crime of fictitious investment. As the defendant invested a great number of capitals in the project actually, the conduct would not harm the society, so it does not conform to the nature feature of the crime.
II. About the Issue of illegal occupation of agricultural land
Regarding to the issue of illegal occupation of land, I would like to talk about several key viewpoints for the purpose of making some key clues of each problem clear, by which we could analyze mutually whether the conduct constitute the crime.
First of all, the most basic problem that concerned in the crime is whether to go through land leasing formalities. A lot of evidences in the courtroom investigation proved that, land leasing formalities is under progress. It’s the most basic fact as a lot of evidences prove it. Though at the beginning Yang Bin did not have enough awareness at the aspect, he did not know these procedures. But after consultancy and request on the construction process of whole project, the accused companies always go through all kinds of related formalities on land transfer. So we could not neglect and deny the most basic fact.
Secondly, I would like to say, land leasing formalities must be completed. I have to emphasize that it's not laws which stipulate they must be completed as legal regulations could be followed or violated or else the crime would not occur. I want to say, the case did not have right not to complete land formalities objectively. Why? The reason is very clear: legal land formalities are the premise of house sales and gas station business. Without land leasing formalities, house sell licenses could not be issued and gas station also could not be operated. Yang Bin built gas station and houses for sales but not for just showing. Since gas station and houses are for sales, the purpose could not be realized without land license. Everyone knows this principle and Yang Bin knows it better. The fact proves completely that it’s impossible objectively not to complete land formalities and hide the truth.
Thirdly, I would like to say further that, the basic reason why land formalities could not be completed is not legal impediment but that land leasing fee could not be solved properly. So since there is objective limitation that land formalities could not be escaped actually, it reflects the basic reason that land formalities were not completed by nature. That’s to say, land leasing fee problem is the basic reason why land formalities could not be completed. The focus that land formalities could not be completed is the capital problem but not the matter that violates laws. Of course, some projects could not be approved though money is paid. Or else it would result in law violation. But the problem that the case concerns is to be given with legality when land leasing fee is paid totally. Under the circumstance, we need to make clear why land leasing fee could not be paid timely. It’s the fourth question that I would like to say:
Fourthly, there is good reason for unpaid land leasing fee.
Evidences show that the municipal government has still owed the accused companies over RMB 70 million Yuans but total amount of land leasing fee is over RMB 40 million Yuans with the difference of over RMB 20 million Yuans. Under the circumstance, though the defendant wrote reports and applications to the government, they also agreed to offset land leasing fee with that owing fund. But it could not be realized for one reason or another, and it resulted in unpaid land leasing fee. Who should take the responsibility? It should not be imposed on the defendant at least. Moreover, though there is a responsibility, it also belongs to civil legal relation instead of criminal responsibility prosecuted.
Just now the public prosecutors mentioned one viewpoint that the offsetting is the reversal of causality. Land leasing fee should be paid before requesting the government for money or else the defendant violates laws. The defenders think, the offsetting of the fund is not the reversal of causality. The so-called offsetting is the relationship of general ledger without sequence. Or else it’s not called offsetting as money is an object, a currency as well as a presentation of one value. When the debtor-creditor relationship becomes intersectional, it requires mutual-offsetting, namely it’s a very simple arithmetic. When we could not completed arithmetic question to the end, it results in the outcome that should not have occurred. The defendant should not take the responsibility as well as the criminal responsibility.
Therefore, the defenders think, when the public prosecutors bring the accusation, they escape or at least diminish land leasing fee problem but point it to another direction which results in an impression that laws are violated. The determination lacks evidences.
After this, I need to say, though the defendant violated related administrative regulations during completing land leasing formalities, or rather he has not completed it timely or done it according to “simultaneous policy”, this kind of conducts occur with good cause. So it could not determine or at least prove that the defendant and defendant companies occupied illegally agricultural land subjectively. Specifically the crime refers to intentional crime which means illegal use agricultural land subjectively without completing land formalities. Or else it would result in objective crime. Therefore the defenders think, evidences are lacked for determining the crime of use illegally agricultural land against the defendant and his companies. It is unfair too in applicable laws.
III. About the Issue of Forging Financial Document
More debates are made by both parties on the crime of counterfeiting financial bills and notes and involved in two problems mainly: one is how to determine the conduct; another one is what responsibility Yang Bin should take on this issue.
Firstly let’s look at the determination problem. Objectively the evidences of the prosecuting party are defective and deficient, but the defenders did not deny the fact of counterfeiting financial bills and notes. It seems that the form of the conduct conforms to the feature of counterfeiting financial bills and notes. Would this conduct be determined as a crime of counterfeiting financial bills and notes? This is the question that we should think carefully about the determination of the crime.
The defenders kindly request the court to pay attention to this question: crime objectiveness is the most important limitation of differentiating crime nature. Among all kinds of crimes stipulated by the Criminal Law of China, the basic symbol of differentiating crime nature refers to mainly the object that the crime acts violate. The object that the crime of counterfeiting financial bills and notes violates is the management order on financial document, but not the object that the case’s acts point at. The purpose of counterfeiting financial bills and notes in the case was very clear just for increasing fictitious performance which was stated clearly and definitely during the bill of complaint. Though financial bills and notes were counterfeited, all these financial bills and notes were not released to the public. It shows that the actor did not realize objectively the value that these financial bills and notes indicate, and subjectively pursue any value of this kind. Or rather the outcome of this kind was not realized, and the goal of this kind was not pursued. This is a very important question that draws special attention.
The public prosecutors may think, they pursue unlawful interest that they should not get finally through making fictitious financial reports and counterfeiting financial document. It may sound reasonable to an extent. But the defenders'd like to say, the logic violates one basic principle of laws logically. Concretely it is involved in the problem that how causality is determined legally. As you know, causality chain is repeated and circular without limitation. But the laws stipulate that how causality is determined only through one of sections among the chain, or else it would result in endless causality, vague boundary between crimes as well as endless expansion of criminal responsibility.
I would like to take a simplest example on the purpose of acquiring interest: why do we eat? Just for living which is for working which is for making money. Can we say we eat for the purpose of making money? Obviously we can not. It’s as if we used to say we work hard for communism, and we cannot raise a slogan of eating for communism. Therefore, the above understanding seems normal apparently, but when we analyze it in details and find it would mix up the relations between different levels of causality chain and this logic is not allowed legally. Such an example occurred in our life: one person crushed other during driving in one accident, and the injured died of tetanus when he was in hospital. Then his wife died from excessive sadness and their child finally died from disease for being raised by none…… if all these series of outcomes are imposed on the troublemaker, the traffic accident would result in a series of crimes of intentional injury and indirect international homicide. This way to determine a crime is obviously not applicable legally.
During the debates, the public prosecutors still mentioned the problem of implicated offender. The defenders think, this problem could not be deemed as the concept of implicated offender. Implicated offender or absorbable offender remains only a theoretic viewpoint nowadays which none could understand it clearly so far including me. Thus, the concept and punishment principle of implicated offender or absorbable offender is not defined clearly legally. Theoretically implicated offender also is not always determined by one crime, so are some among different crimes. But act of purpose sometimes absorbs instrument act or act of perpetrating sometimes absorbs preparatory act. We should determine it based on what object it violates. If two acts bring harm directly, they could be determined by one crime as instrument act and act of purpose produce harmful outcome independently. But when instrument act does not produce material harm directly and harmful outcome to the society, instrument act should be subject to act of purpose and it can be determined upon the principle of act of purpose absorbing instrument act.
By combining the specific situation of the case, because the act of counterfeiting financial bills and notes did not produce the outcome of realizing the value of financial bills and notes and pursuing purpose of this kind, the act did not harm the management order of the state in financial bills and notes but the management order of the company which was the object that it harmed. Therefore, the act conforms more to the features of the crime of providing fictitious financial reports in it. As a matter of fact, constituting condition of the crime of providing fictitious financial reports has already included all kinds of faking methods of which they include the method of counterfeiting financial bills and notes. So according to the principles of a legally prescribed punishment for a specified crime, the act of making fictitious financial reports by all kinds of faking methods should be determined with the crime. I can say the thought conforms to original intention of lawmaking.
During the case of Dongfang Electronic Company heard by Yantai Municipal Intermediate Court that happened not long ago, defendant companies made fictitious financial reports, counterfeiting banking bills and related other bills up to 1509 copies amounting to RMB 1.7 billion Yuans, so it was sentenced by the crime of providing fictitious financial reports. The prejudication could support highly the above viewpoints that the defenders have.
Secondly it’s about the problem of determining responsible persons. Just now the public prosecutors also mentioned, according to laws’ regulations, legal representative is not always the directly responsible person in charge. The viewpoint is correct. The responsible persons of company crime can be classified definitely by criminal legislation into two types: one is directly responsible person in charge, and another one is directly responsible personnel. The legal representative should not always bear criminal responsibility against some specific company acts. It’s an important difference between criminal responsibility and civil responsibility.
Therefore, during specific cases, we must follow laws and regulations to certify the responsibility undertaker of company crimes by evidences. In the case, all evidences shown by the courtroom investigation reflected two problems obviously: firstly Yan Chang incited to counterfeit financial bills and notes and he also acted as a vice chairman of board of directors who was in charge of capital operation and the finance of listed company; secondly, no evidence could prove that Yang Bin knew or participated in it. I do not repeat some evidences I quoted in the courtroom investigation. To sum up, the testimonies of Sang Shuhua or other persons could not prove it by a certain detailed fact or scene except for some vague expressions like “should know” or “certainly know”. Some testimony showed that Yang Bin knew the matter of fictitious account including enquiry in banks. We do not care if the testimony is true and reliable for the time being. Though it is true, all testimonies that mentioned these problems were about that Yang Bin knew the fictitious accounts but none of testimonies could prove that Yang Bin participated in counterfeiting financial bills and notes. Under the circumstance, how could it determine Yang Bin should take responsibility for the act of counterfeiting financial bills and notes?
During the methods of making fictitious financial reports, the method of counterfeiting financial bills and notes served only as one of methods rarely used. It is neither the only method nor the most important method. As financial bills and notes were not counterfeited, fictitious financial report also could be completed. There was no only positive connection between counterfeiting financial bills and notes and making fictitious financial reports but the caused among “cause and effect”. Therefore, it could not determine Yang Bin knew certainly the matter of counterfeiting financial bills and notes and should take responsibility for the act of counterfeiting financial bills and notes if Yang Bin knew the matter of making fictitious financial reports.
The defenders notice that the public prosecutors still mentioned another viewpoint, namely though Yang Bin did not participate in or know the matter of counterfeiting financial bills and notes, he also should take responsibility for the whole act including making fictitious financial reports if only he participated in or knew the matter of making fictitious financial reports. This viewpoint seems reasonable apparently, but the defenders must point out hereby that, the public prosecutors made a self-contradictory mistake on the problem. Let’s come back to the problem of absorbable offender and implicated offender that we talked about just now. If one crime is determined on both acts of counterfeiting financial bills and notes and making fictitious financial reports, actors should take responsibility for the whole acts. But the public prosecutors have already deemed them as two independent crimes on absorbable offender and implicated offender. Since they are two independent crimes, why does it require actors should bear criminal responsibility for independent act which constitutes another crime when actors knew only one act? The understanding is not feasible legally. The legislation stipulates in two different articles that two acts constitute two independent crimes. We have no reason to require actors should bear criminal responsibility for another act that they do not know and could constitute another crime independently.
VI About the Issue of Contractual Fraud
The following problems should be understood first before analyzing whether the acts of the defendant and defendant companies could constitute contractual fraud:
1. Land purchasing and calling back are two different acts that conduct under situation change without positive connection between them.
Land purchased by the defendant was for “balance land” and “index purchased” actually not for sales afterwards. During purchasing land, land was under the control of counterpart who knew the land situation. But the defendant has never been to Faku and the land. Therefore, the defendant was unlikely to cheat the counterpart at the aspect.
After land was purchased, the provincial land management department ordered to call back the land for uniform management due to policy change. At the moment, it was not the idea of the defendant to acquire land with compensation, and subject to the will of the defendant. Moreover, the price of land called back also was confirmed by the provincial land management center. Thus, the defendant did not know it clearly when he purchased land.
To sum up, there was no positive connection between land purchasing and calling back, so that the defendant had two different awarenesses subjectively. It’s a very important question. The defenders notice that, the one of reasons why the defendant was accused against fraud intentionally in the case was that the prosecuting party mixed up the different periods where there was no positive connection between land purchasing and calling back, connected two different legal acts and came up with that the defendant carried out fraud act intentionally when they analyzed the case details.
2. The defendant had no objective act of fabricating facts and no object was cheated.
The nature of fraud is that actors fabricate facts and lure counterpart into the bait. But in the case no evidence proves the defendant had this kind of acts and the party who called back was cheated otherwise.
The public prosecutors think, when the defendant purchased the land, he made fictitious constructed farmland by sign contract reversely and then sold to the provincial land arrangement center at high price. It could prove that the defendant cheated. The defenders think, the public prosecutors mixed up two basic concepts here, and then also mixed up two legal relations with different nature. The defenders notice that, the public prosecutors used two similar expressions of “constructing fictitious land” and “making fictitious constructed land” during the courtroom investigation and debates. Though the three characters in the above expressions are the same, they mean totally differently due to different order.
Let’s analyze, “constructing fictitious land” refers to constructing a fictitious farmland. It’s a fraud act if the fictitious farmland is sold to others; vice versa, “making fictitious constructed land” in the case refers to obtaining a real farmland which is constructed by others but not actor himself. It’s not a fraud act if the constructed farmland is sold to others. So the defendant in the case belongs to “constructing fictitious land” or “making fictitious constructed land”? Any land which needs construction has one construction process. The crops could not be planted on the land that has not constructed. The land may be constructed by him or others in this year or the year before last. No matter what it is, it becomes a farmland that has been constructed but not “fictitious land” as soon as it’s been constructed. It is the most important question. Therefore, “constructing fictitious land” and “making fictitious constructed land” are two different concepts. The act of the defendant in the case obviously belongs to “making fictitious constructed land” but not “constructing fictitious land”. If two concepts are mixed up, a mistake must be made in determining act nature.
In the case, the defendant obtained a “fictitious constructed land” by buying index with money and it only showed he faked in obtaining the land. But buying index could not constitute a crime. Importantly the defendant obtained one constructed real land by “making fictitious constructed land”.
When the defendant delivered the land to the provincial land arrangement center as an object of assignment, the defendant did not cheat the counterpart. As a matter of fact, the reason is very simple: the child that borne by one is one's child, so is the child adopted. If one’s daughter gets married, is it wrong that adopted daughter gets married? We could see that, what the defendant delivered to the provincial land arrangement center was “a fictitious constructed land” but not “a fictitious unconstructed land”, so there is no factual fraudulent act between buying and selling relations.
Equally the provincial land arrangement center had obtained a constructed real farmland but not a fictitious farmland which was investigated and measured by purchaser who confirmed the price as well. Therefore, the provincial land arrangement center was not cheated. That’s to say, there is no object which is cheated in the case.
3. Over RMB 1.2 million Yuans paid to Faku County by the defendant was land construction fee but not bribery money.
The public prosecutors think, the defendant bribed to the land management bureau of Faku County RMB 0.98 million Yuans and to Zhang Jiaxu RMB250,000 Yuans. They collaborated with each other to sell “fictitious” land which was obtained “free of charge” to the provincial land arrangement center at high price so as to bring loss to the nation. Thus, it constituted fraud act and bribery act.
The defenders think, public prosecutors’ understanding lacked support by evidences and was denied obviously by the existing evidences.
First of all, over RMB 1.2 million was paid for land construction fee openly and legally. The evidences showed that, these fees were paid in cheque and “farmland construction fee”, “land construction fee” and “earthworks fee” were indicated clearly on the invoices issued by the counterpart. The payment terms could prove the subjective awareness that the defendant had when he paid it as what Yang Bin said in the court: “when I saw it’s ‘land construction fee’ shown on the payment bill, I agreed and signed it. If it showed bribery money, I did not sign it.”
Secondly, these payments that the defendant had made were unlikely to be unknown by the land owners. The evidences showed that, when buying index, people form the village and town attended the negotiation and signed land purchase contract though it’s taken charge by the land management bureau of Faku County. At the moment, we do not repeat the trueness and legal effect of the contract. I would like to say, since the village and town governments knew this land was purchased by the defendant companies and price was agreed, they would not give up the right of acquiring land fee. Though the public prosecutors thought, half of the land belonged to the village actually. Another half up to over 800 mu was amounted to over RMB 600,000 Yuans which could not be unknown to them obviously. If the land management bureau of Faku County gave the land secretly to the defendant as the village and town governments knew this situation, the defendant would be likely to obtain the land by fraud and bribery. But this assumption did not exist. It completely removed the objective possibility of land construction fee becoming bribery money.
The public prosecutors have only evidence namely Zhang Jiaxu’s testimony to prove the “land construction fee” became “bribery money”. But how could the testimony stand up against a lot of original material evidences and documentary evidences including land purchase contract, payment term, payment details and negotiation that participated by the village and town governments? It’s well known that, among the seven types of evidences stipulated by Criminal Procedure Law, probative force of material evidence is stronger than that of witness’s testimony. The latter stands against the former, and it would violate the principle of determining evidence.
The outcome of “land construction fee” was considered to be “bribery money” would “kill two birds with one stone” which means to produce two crimes of bribery and fraud. The outcome is very serious. The land management bureau of Faku County and Zhang Jiaxu retained for their own use the “land construction fee” paid by the defendant, which is said to be bribery money. The one who has robbed other’s money, forces other to admit the money is given as a gift. The thought violates normal logics.
Finally, the defenders still request the court to pay attention to another problem: if it could determine defendant companies obtained fictitious constructed land by bribery to the land management bureau of the county and sold it to the nation. Therefore it constitutes the crime of fraud. If so, he land management bureau of Faku County became joint offender in the fraud. But it became the object who accepted the bribery in the case. The problem could not be explained.
Regarding other problems in the case, I will not repeat them as other defenders have already made overall presentation.
I hope the court will attach importance to the above submission.
Thank you!
Yang Bin’s defender: Tian Wenchang from Beijing King & Capital Law Firm
June 13, 2003
After Tian Wenchang finished his speech, the chief judge asked procuratorial organization: “public prosecutors, do you have new opinions?”
“No.” they answered.
The chief judge asked lawyers: “defendant attorney agent, do you have new opinions?”
“No.” Tian Wenchang answered.
The chief judge asked again:
“According to Article 160 of Criminal Procedure Law of People’s Republic of China, the defendant has right to make final presentation. Representatives of the defendants, Shenyang Euro-Asia Industries Company and Shenyang Euro-Asia Agriculture Company, do you have new opinions?”
“No.” Bian Shoujie answered.
“No.” Yang Fenglin answered.
“Now Yang Bin makes final presentation.” Chief judge said.
It’s 4:30 am when I had a look at my watch.
Yang Bin stood up and made final self-defense statements in the first instance of Shenyang Municipal Intermediate People’s Court ---
Respectable chief justice, judges and lawyers:
Thank you for giving me this opportunity to deliver the final speech. It’s highly appreciated if the laws could return me a little innocence.
One has committed a crime due to his experience, especially his growth-up. I would like to talk about my growth-up experience.
I was born in Nanjing on February 11, 1963. My parents divorced when I was five, and then I became an orphan. My grandma bred me up by making money little by little with a small tea booth. I was exempted from tuition from the primary school. At that time, how could I think about what I have owned today? I was growing up by living in slums in Nanjing. At that moment, what I thought most was to make more money for buying something good for my grandma when I grew up.
When I was a child, I saw others boating in the lake of Nanjing. I played it once but only sitting in a wooden cask. Once I saw through the door gap that others ate orange, but I was slapped in the face by my grandma. She said: “Why do you admire what other have so much? You could make it when you grow up!”
When I was eight, I waited for my mother at the gate of a factory. I followed her and walked for one hour for asking her for paying tuition. She slapped my in the face too, threw RMB5 Yuans onto the ground, and told me not to turn to her for ever. When I pick the money up and took home, my grandma slapped me again and said: “You are ashamed. Why don’t you make money by yourself when you grow up?”
As I grew up with help of many people, I had strong patriotism sense when I went to Holland. In Leiden, Holland where I lived, I saw advanced agriculture modes there. The annual income per capita of the farmers there was US$250,000. I thought how wonderful if I could bring back Dutch agriculture to China which could allow Chinese farmers to be wealthy as Dutch farmers!
In 1991 and 1992, I did business in Holland and East Europe such as putting a booth on ground or selling garments. I experienced a lot of hardships among the difficult business.
In 1993, I brought the concepts of Dutch agriculture back to China. But everyone could not understand it including my wife. She said why you did not want to do other businesses but to be a farmer? Or even the No.803 working team members also said (afterwards): are you Yang Bin? Why do you deal in greenhouses? Are they useful?
I know, modern flowers and agriculture need greenhouses and refrigeration houses which I introduced from Holland. I have built Euro-Asia Jiluofu refrigeration houses and Laitai Flowers Market in Beijing. I can say it’s me, Yang Bin who made such booming flowers industry in China today.
In 1998, I came to Shenyang. Frankly I did not want to come here at that time. Xu Wencai and Yang Xinhua from Shenyang City visited me for three times for inviting me to be here. I also know, it’s very difficult to do everything without support from the government. So I sold Laitai Flowers Market in Beijing to Beijing Municipal Industry & Commerce Head Office at RMB58 million Yuans which became the initial capital source.
In 2000, I collected back funds all over the country slowly for building Holland Village.
Regarding the issue of fictitious investment, I also know it must be legalized. But as I understood, companies could be registered with ZERO capital in Holland, with one Yuan in Hong Kong. Afterwards, Li Gang and Yan Chang said registered capital was not legal and I asked them to change it certainly; Holland Village today has exceeded highly ten times the initial capital. What I invested is for the development of Shenyang City. The capital of Euro-Asia Industries is always real but not fictitious. I kindly request the court that the problem of other four companies should be investigated; the construction payment of Nantong Sanjian was made totally in according to laws. The houses of Holland Village are not completed and accepted yet so far, thus total payments should not be made. I paid 90%.
Regarding the land issue, I have gone through formalities actually. But high-tech agricultural demonstration base of 110 hectares need experts, such as experts from Holland who live inside. So I decided to develop some real estate; bus station was built for the convenience of nearby farmers.
Regarding developing 3000 hectares agricultural base, I want to something good for local farmers actually. Chinese enterprises want to do it. I gave money to Li Ye for knowing him and doing business with time in future. So I did not incite ones to change No.598 document. Please reinvestigate it again.
Regarding contractual fraud, it is totally unjust case. I seldom contacted with Zhang Jiaxu. He was only a section chief and it’s very difficult for him to meet me. Our business also was very normal with good purpose and legal land. The files of the land and resources department said “not to deal with it as illegal one.”
Regarding counterfeiting financial bills and notes, Euro-Asia Agriculture could be listed by capital obtained by Yan Chang. Fictitious accounts were made by some ones he asked. All oral confessions showed that “Yang Bin knows this matter”, but in fact, I have never take part in it before April 2002 and after this, Sang Shuhua (chief CPA of Euro-Asia Industries – noted by the writer) and others took part in it. I don’t know much about it.
Finally I would like to say, I was a Chinese child who grew up by relying on waters from Yangtze River. If I really commit crimes, the mother would punish her child. How could I blame my mother as her child?
Above-mentioned were Yang Bin’s confessions.
Yang Bin made full use of 30 minutes to make self-defense statements. His emotion was reached to the peak since the session was opened. Yang Bin had a very clear mind and denounced the viewpoints of the prosecuting party by keeping to the key points. Moreover, his speech was full of emotion and reasons which touched audience with his sincerity.
When I was sitting on the audit seat, I saw two women sitting besides with tears on their faces when Yang Bin described his unfortunate experience in his early age and the final paragraph “If I really commit crimes, the mother would punish her child. How could I blame my mother as her child?” In fact, Yang Bin’s unfortunate experience and family in his early age were much bitter than what he said. Peoples seldom knew it. His unfortunate childhood experience pressed him like shadow or even nightmare so much that he could not breathe and finally affected him.
After 20-minute adjournment, chief judge declared the 3-day hearing briefly: “After judge’s private sitting of collegial bench, now I declare the hearing of the first session an end; collegial bench will give full consideration into the opinions of both parties and will not pronounce a judgment or sentence in the court. Be noticed otherwise of the judgment!”
After the court trial was over. The judges allowed representatives from embassy of Holland in China and Yang Bin’s family met Yang Bin respectively for 10 minutes. Yang Fenglin, Aunt IV of Yang Bin and I stood at the passageway outside No.11 court. When we saw Yang Bin was taken over by the court policemen, we greeted to each other.
“Teacher Guan!” Yang Bin had a look at me bitterly: “Everyone is OK?”
I know “everyone” that he mentioned referred to the consultants who participated in the negotiation of the Fundamental Law of Sinuiju Special Administrative Region. I nodded my head and said nothing.
Yang Bin was taken into one empty room, and Yang Fenglin entered and met with him.
At the moment, tens of reporters from home and abroad were still crowded outside the gate. They enquiried messages from Yang Bin’s family members, employees and the ones who participated in the audit.
My mood turned very heavy. When my friend, Xu Xun, the reporter from Hong Kong Commercial Daily invited me for supper, I had no appetite for it. At my heart I always asked myself, why Yang Bin ended up like this? It may be what Xu Xun and Xu Yinan from Oriental Daily concerned. I talked about Yang Bin’s character, his “poor orphan complex” that he was very inferior in his childhood. He was of strong self-esteem or even arrogancy.
He was short of accomplishment to Chinese culture and history, deep understanding to Chinese society. He had a little “low IQ” in politics. So he made an arbitrary decision on management, he could not make full use of talents and he acted too frugally towards money so that he did not spend money to appoint experts of all levels to serve him, as a result it resulted in mistakes of this kind or another that he should have avoided totally.
I remembered that I only told Xu Xun and Lu Yinan about the reasons of Yang Bin's character but nothing about others about society, environment, media or even systems. I was afraid that overseas media would distort my original intention and result in unnecessary troubles.
First-instance Judgment & Second-instance Affirmation of First-instance Judgment
In July 14, Shenyang Municipal Intermediate People’s Court made first-instance judgment on the case that Yang Bin and his related enterprises were suspected of being involved in economic crimes.
At 8:30 am, people walked into the court one by one. Besides Yang Fenglin, Aunt IV of Yang Bin and Bian Shoujie who represented respectively Euro-Asia Agriculture and Euro-Asia Industries Company, there were Yang Fengqu, Aunt I of Yang, Yang Fengqi, Aunt III and her husband Shan Huiming who participated in the audit as Yang’s family members.
At 9:00 am, the court declared the session open.
Yang Bin appeared in the court, and he was still dressed in white T-shirt and blue-white grillwork pants that he used to wear indoor instead of light trousers that he used to wear daily. He was wearing black plastic sandals. His hair was loose and uncombed with tired face in a sluttery. When he stepped into the court, he shouted at the judges discontentedly: why did you wake me to get up and not let me know before I was asked to be here.
The audiences sitting on the audit seats watched Yang Bin surprisingly.
The chief justice declared the session open and read out paper of judgment which was as long as up to 68 pages so that it took more than one hour to read it all.
After reading the paper, chief justice asked if Bian Shoujie and Yang Fenglin who represented Shenyang Euro-Asia Industries Company and Shenyang Euro-Asia Agriculture Company understood clearly the judgment. If they refused to accept as final, they would be entitled to appeal.

Yang Fenglin answered: We must appeal!
The chief justice asked Yang Bin finally: “the defendant, Yang Bin, did you understand the judgment clearly?”
Yang Bin answered: Yes, I did.
The chief justice: if the defendant refuses to accept the judgment as final, you will be entitled to appeal to Liaoning Provincial Higher People's Court through Shenyang Municipal Intermediate People’s Court or directly within ten days starting from the second day of the receipt of the judgment!
Yang Bin took up microphone and said emotionally and loudly: “We must appeal!”
After that, the chief justice declared the first instance judgment an end and Yang Bin was taken away from the court.
When people stood up and left the court, Aunt III and VI of Yang Bin shouted loudly discontentedly to the court: “how unjust! How could you treat foreign investors like this?”
When the judgment was over, the court arranged 10-minute meeting between Yang Bin and Situ Lanting and another diplomat from the embassy of Holland in China. After it, Yang Bin was allowed to meet with his family for 10 minutes. Yang Bin arranged Yang Fenglin to take charge of Holland Village for the time being.
When diplomats of Dutch embassy walked out of the court, reporters from home and abroad rushed forwards to them and asked them about judgment and related opinions. Situ Lanting indicated he would provide to Dutch government the session situation and he made no expression if the judgment was just or not. He said he would add in the report that if Yang Bin would be delivered over to Holland. Chinese government determined whether Yang would be deported. He said, laws of Holland and China were different and both countries would discuss on them.
In the afternoon on that day, Xinhua News Agency released the news about the first instance judgment on “Yang Bin case”:
Yang Bin was sentenced to a joinder of punishments for plural crimes and eighteen years fixed term imprisonment in the first instance.
Shenyang branch of Xinhua News Agency: on the 14, Liaoning Province Shenyang Municipal Intermediate People’s Court made the first-instance judgment on the crimes of contractual fraud, counterfeiting financial bills and notes and illegal occupation of agricultural land etc in which the defendant Yang Bin and his related enterprises have committed. The defendant company, namely Shenyang Euro-Asia Industries Co., Ltd. was sentenced to a joinder of punishments for plural crimes and fine of RMB 5.6 million Yuans for the crimes of illegal occupation of agricultural land, contractual fraud, bribery to and for companies. The defendant company, namely Shenyang Euro-Asia Agriculture Development Co., Ltd. was sentenced to fine of RMB 400,000 Yuans for the crime of counterfeiting financial bills and notes. The defendant Yang Bin was sentenced to a joinder of punishments for plural crimes of fictitious investment, illegal occupation of agricultural land, contractual fraud, bribery to and for companies and counterfeiting financial bills and notes, eighteen years fixed term imprisonment and fine of RMB 2.3 million Yuans.
The court investigated and ascertained through hearings, the defendant, Yang Bin, male, born in Nanjing, Jiang Su, China on February 11, 1963, with the nationality of the Kingdom of the Holland, was the chairman of the board of directors and legal representative of Shenyang Euro-Asia Industries Co., Ltd. and Shenyang Euro-Asia Agriculture Development Co., Ltd. before he was arrested. From April 1998 to July 2001, Shenyang Euro-Asia Industries Co., Ltd., Shenyang Hague hotel Co., Ltd., Shenyang Holland Village Housing Development Co., Ltd., Shenyang Euro-Asia Greenhouse Co., Ltd. and Shenyang Euro-Asia International Consultancy Co., Ltd. with Yang Bin as the legal representative used counterfeited duty paid proofs which should be issued by the national authorities, counterfeited purchase invoices and counterfeited reports on capital verification etc during applying registered capital registration of the companies, and made a fictitious registered capital amounting to over RMB 0.2 billion Yuans by fraud way of “fictitious transfer of borrowed capital.”
From November 1998 to September 2001, Shenyang Euro-Asia Industries Co., Ltd. had violated land management laws to build non-agricultural buildings on agricultural land, illegally use and destroy farmland of 44.51 hectares allocated and leased by the government upon the decision made by Yang Bin, the chairman of the board of directors of the company without prior approval on agricultural land transferred into building land.
In October 2000, the defendant, Yang Bin signed reserved farmland purchase agreement with Liaoning Provincial Land Arrangement Center and cheated the center out of over RMB3 million Yuans for farmland construction fee on behalf of Shenyang Euro-Asia Industries Co., Ltd. as he knew the defendant company, Shenyang Euro-Asia Industries Co., Ltd. had not constructed the farmland actually.
From December 2000 to September 2001, the defendant company, Shenyang Euro-Asia Industries Co., Ltd. and the defendant, Yang Bin had given the previous land planning management bureau of Faku County, Liaoning Province RMB 0.98 million Yuans for the purpose of eluding related land policies of the nation by fraud, and given the civil servant RMB 250,000 Yuans and US$ 20,000 for seeking irregular profits for themselves.
From April 2001 to June 2002, financial staff of the defendant company, Shenyang Euro-Asia Agriculture Development Co., Ltd. had made fictitious account, counterfeited financial bills and notes and wireless transfer receipts and other banking settlement certificates as many as 305 copies with face value amounting to RMB 1.786 billion Yuans for making fictitious performance of the company under Yang Bin’s instruction.
Shenyang Municipal Intermediate People’s Court thought, the defendant, Yang Bin acted as the legal representative of five companies such as Shenyang Euro-Asia Industries Co., Ltd. had violated management laws and regulations of company registration, used fictitious certification documents, conducted fraud methods, made fictitious registered capital for completing company registration with large amount. His acts had constituted the crime of fictitious registered capital. The defendant company, Shenyang Euro-Asia Industries Co., Ltd. had violated land management laws and regulations, built non-agricultural buildings illegally on agricultural land and destroyed a great number of farmland; the company had cheated large amount of money and property by signing contracts for the purpose of illegal use, given money and property to office workers of state authorities for seeking irregular profits for oneself. Its acts had constituted respectively the crimes of illegal occupation of agricultural land, contractual fraud, bribery to and for companies. The defendant, Yang Bin was directly responsible person in charge of the company who committed the above crimes, so he had committed the above crimes also. The defendant company, Shenyang Agriculture Development Co., Ltd. had counterfeited wireless transfer receipts and other banking settlement certificates when the circumstances were particularly serious. Its acts had constituted the crimes of counterfeiting financial bills and notes. The defendant, Yang Bin was directly responsible person in charge of the company who committed the above crimes, so he had committed the above crimes also. Shenyang Municipal Intermediate People’s Court made the above judgments in accordance with laws.
The above were the crimes and punishments of Yang Bin.
In fifty days, on September 6, Liaoning Provincial Higher People's Court held a hearing for the appeal from Yang Bin and his affiliated companies who did not accept as final the first instance judgment made by Shenyang Municipal Intermediate People’s Court. According to Chinese laws, this would become the final judgment.
I arrived in Shenyang on September 4, and lived at D2 villa of Holland Village at the arrangement made by Yang Fenglin where lawyers like Tian Di, Cao Shuchang and so on used to live. They moved to live in the downtown afterwards. The villa became a place where I had been living for days.
At the moment, Pan Chaorong, Yang Bin’s wife had already come to Shenyang from Holland and lived at A9 of Holland Village where Yang Bin used to live.
On September 4, I visited Li Gang, who still lived at Holland Village, and Shi Jun, who came just from Beijing. Both of them were vice-GMs of Euro-Asia Group. We had gotten along with each other very well during the months when I lived at Holland Village. So we became old friends. When we met and talked to each other, we were filled with too much signs with emotion!
At 8 am on September 6, Yang Bin’s family such as Yang Fenglin and company staff such as Shi Jun and I drove to Liaoning Provincial Higher People's Court. At the moment, about ten reporters form home and abroad had been waiting there at the gate of the court. But compared with those came for the last hearing held in June, fewer reporters came there this time. Perhaps, they lost confidence when they knew they were not allowed to access to the court for interview. Perhaps, they knew everything was determined and would not be changed in this judgment so that it lost news interest. Those reporters were mostly from reporter stations in Shenyang. They still enquiried messages by all means, and asked the future of Holland Village. I was very moved at their perseverance and loyalty to their works.
At 8:30 am, we started to enter into Liaoning Provincial Higher People's Court. This time the control and inspection were carried out very strictly on the persons who participated in the audit. We were asked not only to show audit cards, ID cards, fill forms and informed that we were not allowed to take sound recorders or note books in. we went through detailed and strict security inspection.
On September 6 and 7, courtroom investigation, cross-examination and debates were carried out on the six crimes of Yang Bin and his related companies in the two-day court trial.
In the morning on September 7, Yang Bin declared his statement of defense to the court of the second instance as follows:
Truth Proves My innocence
----To All People worldwide who Love Peace
I was born in one poor family in Nanjing in 1963. As I lost my parents, I have never felt mother and father love as others, and I was bred up by my grandma. It’s CPC who allowed me to complete the education of primary school and high school free of charge. That’s to say, I was one child who grew up under red flag.
Before my philosophy became finalized at the age of eighteen, I was taught by two educations: one was the patriotism education and another one was the internationalism education. The former one told me about Liu Hulan, Dong Cunrui and other heroes who devoted themselves to the undertaking of national liberation, as well as about Lei Feng and Jiao Yulu and heroes who devoted themselves to the socialism. It’s these patriotism educations which had great impact on my life of forty years. Among the peers, I was always stepping to the front of the time, as I want to become a national hero in this time. I can say I have devoted all myself – or even my freedom to the battlefield without guns of reform and opening up. I have completed a lot of projects including the investment in the largest flowers market in Beijing, construction in Euro-Asia flowers in Heibei, Jilin, Dalian and Shandong together with Holland Village, the largest foreign invested project in Shenyang. I do not know how much effort and hardship I have made and experienced during past 10 years. I have introduced almost all kinds of flowers from Holland to China. It’s said in flower circle: “if there is no Yang Bin, there is no modern flower undertaking in China today.” I remember, in 1998, the minister of the Agriculture Ministry of Holland took the delegation to visit Laitai flower project I invested. When he ended his visit, he said to me: “We felt glad and regretted as you joined in the nationality of Holland. We felt glad because you popularized Dutch architectures and tulips in China so that Chinese knew Netherland was a flower kingdom. We regretted because you had Dutch greenhouses and refrigeration houses produced domestically in China. You brought all good types and technologies from Netherland into China so that Dutch farmers would make a hard living in the following ten years.” Although he was just kidding, it showed a spirit of heroism of a patriotic overseas Chinese from another point of view.
Meanwhile, I received another education – internationalism education which told me there was a place far away called Canada and a doctor named Bethune who cured Chinese selflessly and devoted his life to Chinese liberation. It’s also internationalism education which told me, a child who grew up living by the Yangtze River, there was a river called Yalu in northeastern China, a beautiful country named North Korea by eastern bank of the river. By the beginning of 1950, many praisable and applaudable stories happened here, and many internationalism fighters came into being such as Luo Shengjiao, Yang Gensi and other heroes. Who are the Most Lovable Ones written by Wei Wei, a great work won universal praise, moved the hearts of many Chinese teenagers. I remember when we had lesson of the article, my teacher said: “students, more than 400,000 soldiers of Voluntary Army sacrificed their lives in North Korea for the undertaking of North Korean liberation. Sino-North Korean friendship was turned from lives and blood and formed by blood and meat. You must remember this history, inherit unfulfilled wish of revolution and martyrs.” I was a docile child. Afterwards I did it very well as what the teacher said. I was given recognition and trust of 23 million North Korean people who I hope not to forget me, a Chinese with Dutch nationality who has lost his freedom for the prosperity and development of North Korea. Everything I have done was originated from internationalism education I had received from CPC.
In 1997, I came to Changchun for investing Jilin Euro-Asia and Shenyang Euro-Asia in Shenyang in 1998. When I came to the Northeast, I found economy there got behind compared with that in the South and middle and lower reaches of Yangtze River because Northeast missed three historical opportunities namely early opening up of Shenzhen, economic development of the South and middle and lower reaches of Yangtse River and Northwestern development since China carried out the policy of reform and opening up.
As one Shenyang freeman, I have been thinking how to develop Northeastern economy. I remember when I was in Holland that one famous economist predicted that, there will be three hotspots in future global economy: US, EC and Northeast Asia. As Japan, South Korea, North Korea, Northeast and Jiaodong Peninsula cover 75％ of GDP of the whole Asian economy, which amounts nearly US$7000 billion. When the great economic circle is connected, it will accelerate the development of Northeastern economy. But due to unstable factors of North Korean Peninsula and close-up of North Korea, the great economic circle is very difficult to be connected unless North Korea is opened up to outside world.
Since 2001, I went to North Korea where I have been expecting and persuaded North Korean leaders to open up to outside with my sincere heart. The door which has been closed up for 50 years was opened. It surprised and shocked the whole world. But as soon as the door was opened up, so-called No.803 special team shut it up heartlessly.
I remember in the morning on October 4 last year, over 1000 fully armed policemen took away a patriotic overseas bare-handed Chinese. On that day I never felt afraid, as I predicted the day would come since I became the Chief Executive of the Special Administrative Region. I know deeply reform pioneers have come to no good end: Shang Yang was torn to death simultaneously by five horses for his political reform; Tan Sitong lost his head at Caishikou during Mu Shu Political Reform; Zhang Zhixin from Liaoning was shot dead with gun at the outskirt of Shenyang for insisting on that practice is a standard which verifies truth. All these happened on the land which covered 9.6 million sq.km. These are Chinese history and tragedies that China repeats.
I remember when I went to North Korea, I was opposed by my family and everyone around me, or even my wife wanted to divorce with me for this reason. But all could not change my determination. I want to help North Korea to develop and open itself to outside world with my sincerity and ability. Things will develop in the opposite direction when they become extreme and it is isolated. Only when 23 million North Korean people join into international economic family, peace will come and become steady. I hope all people who love peace worldwide will understand North Korea.
I remember on October 4 last year, after I was arrested, I asked the staff of special group for examining my case about what crime I had. They answered me clearly why you went to become the Chief Executive of the special region, though you had had no crimes but we would find out your crimes soon. Well, I understood it. All these happened because I went to become the Chief Executive of the special region. Is it illegal to become the Chief Executive of the special region? Is it also illegal to love peace? Is it also illegal to inherit unfulfilled wish of 400,000 revolutionary martyrs? Oh, so many questions…… I remember when I was a child, my grandma scolded me for seeking sin by myself. I did not understand what seeking sin was before, but now I finally understood it. Over 500 personnel of the special group have examined me completely overally or even every cell of mine. Finally they came up with so-called six crimes sculptured by ices, and kept away from sun. Do they stand up historic tests?
Now I can say loudly: I am innocent!
I am innocent: as I love life and I have helped countless helpless families for over 10 years.
I am innocent: as I love my own undertaking as my life.
I am innocent: as I love Holland, I have brought everything form Holland into China, and finally I built up a Holland Village in Shenyang.
I am innocent: as I love China, my motherland, who used to bear and rear me. To help Chinese farmers, I have introduced advanced Dutch technologies into China.
I am innocent: I was the second richest person in China and I don’t need to commit a crime for money.
I am innocent: I am an embracer who insists on three represents. I don’t believe so far I am arrested due to ……
I am innocent: I believe firmly the Party Central Committee will redress for me.
I am innocent: as I love peace, how could the one who loves peace commit a crime? Finally I would like to end my presentation with Pavel’s words:
Life means only once to everyone. When ones recall the past, they won’t regret for dreaming away the time and ending up nothing, because they have devoted all their lives to the liberation undertaking of global proletarians.
I wish hereby to give up everything for the peace of Northeast Asia, my family, wealth, freedom or even my life!
Yang Bin on September 7, 2003
In 4 pm on the 7, the court trial was over. The judge declared a break.
In one hour, the court opened again. The chief justice declared: with judge’s private sitting of collegial bench, original judgment was determined correctly and sentenced appropriately upon facts of crimes, circumstances and extent of harm to society and legal judicial procedure. According to Section 1 of Article 189 of Criminal Procedure Law of People’s Republic of China, the judgment was as follows: “the appeal is dismissed and first-instance judgment is affirmed. The judgment is the final judgment.”
Up to now, “Yang Bin case” which had been lasting for one year, rang down the curtain.
After that, I got to know Yang Bin was put in No.1 prison of Shenyang.
Notes:
① The message came from the talks between Hwang Myong Chol, who still lived at Holland Village at that time and Yang’s family and me.
② Several media from abroad released reports and discussions on it.