The Final Criminal Ruling
Criminal Ruling of the Intermediate People’s Court of Kunming City, Yunnan Province
Original Public Prosecution Organ: The People’s Procuratorate of Xishan District, Kunming City.
Appellant (Original Defendant): Chen Jingyuan, male, Han ethnicity, born June 30, 1976, Citizen ID Number 510212197606300330, PhD degree, unemployed, registered residence in Xuhui District, Shanghai, residing at 407 Zhaojiabang Road, Xuhui District, Shanghai. Criminally detained on September 7, 2022, for this case, and arrested on October 14, 2022, currently detained in the Xishan District Detention Center of Kunming City.
The People’s Court of Xishan District, Kunming City, Yunnan Province, tried the case of defendant Chen Jingyuan picking quarrels and provoking trouble, accused by the People’s Procuratorate of Xishan District, Kunming City, Yunnan Province, and made the criminal judgment (2023) Yun 0112 Xing Chu 57 on April 3, 2023. After the judgment was pronounced, the defendant Chen Jingyuan was not satisfied and filed an appeal. After accepting the case, this court legally formed a collegial panel. After reviewing the case file, interrogating the appellant Chen Jingyuan, and listening to the opinions of the defense lawyer, it was decided not to hold a court hearing for this case. The trial has now concluded.
The original judgment found that: From July 2019 to April 2022, the defendant Chen Jingyuan used circumvention software to use chat tools to spread false statements on the information network, disrupting social order. The defendant Chen Jingyuan was arrested by the police on September 6, 2022, at 13A02, Building 14, Area 1, Rencheng, Xishan District, Kunming City.
Based on the facts found and relevant evidence, the original court, in accordance with the provisions of Article 293, Paragraph 1, Article 47, and Article 64 of the “Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China,” and Article 5, Paragraph 2 of the “Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Handling Criminal Cases of Defamation Using Information Networks,” ruled that: 1. The defendant Chen Jingyuan is guilty of the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble and is sentenced to one year and eight months in prison. 2. The seized computers, mobile phones, and hard drives shall be dealt with according to law.
The original defendant appealed and claimed that:
1. The pictures or information involved in this case do not belong to “false information” in the sense of criminal law;
2. The appellant did not knowingly spread “false information” on the Internet;
3. To determine that the appellant is guilty of this case, it must also be proven that his behavior has disrupted public order to a serious extent, and there is no evidence in this case to prove that the appellant’s behavior seriously disrupted public order and caused serious consequences;
4. The appellant’s behavior does not fall under the circumstances of Article 3 of the “Judicial Interpretation on Online Defamation by the Two Supremes”;
5. From a subjective point of view, the appellant himself did not have the criminal intent to pick quarrels and provoke trouble, and does not meet the subjective elements of picking quarrels and provoking trouble.
After the second instance trial, it was found that: From July 2019 to April 2022, the appellant Chen Jingyuan used circumvention software to use chat tools to spread false statements on the information network, disrupting social order. The appellant Chen Jingyuan was arrested by the police on September 6, 2022, at 13A02, Building 14, Area 1, Rencheng, Xishan District, Kunming City.
The above facts are confirmed by evidence that has been cross-examined and authenticated in the first-instance trial, including household registration certificates, the circumstances of the arrest, the defendant Chen Jingyuan’s confession and defense, witness testimonies, search warrants and search records, seizure decisions and seizure lists, online extraction records, electronic data extraction lists, explanations on the sorting of Chen Jingyuan’s network chat platforms, item review forms, etc. The source of the above evidence is legal, the content is objective and true, and they can form a chain of evidence, which is sufficient to prove the facts of the case. This court confirms all the evidence identified by the original judgment. During the second instance, the appellant did not submit new evidence.
This Court believes that:
the appellant Chen Jingyuan, in the process of using foreign chat software, retweeted pictures and articles which he knew to be insulting and attacking the core national leadership and China’s current political system. The content of these retweets, upon examination, is considered false information, causing serious disruption of public order. His conduct constitutes the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble, and should be punished according to law. Public cyberspace is not a lawless place, and all speech, forwarding of information, and posting of comments online must be done legally. The evidence in this case forms a chain of proof sufficient to establish the appellant’s criminal acts. The appellant’s arguments are not consistent with the established facts and relevant laws, and are therefore rejected by this court. In summary, the original verdict’s findings of fact are clear, the evidence is credible and sufficient, the conviction is accurate, and the sentence is appropriate, and should be upheld according to the law. Therefore, pursuant to Article 236, Paragraph 1, Item (1) of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China,
this Court rules as follows:
The appeal is dismissed, and the original verdict is upheld.
This ruling is final.
Clerk: Yang Tianfu
[Chinese]