Man Claims He Intended to Insult Republican, Not Communist, Party; Still Gets 5 Days In Jail

 First, a summary of the facts of the case:

• September 23, 2019: Zhang Zhixiang posted the following statement to a Wechat group: "文明社会，暴政的共匪不会长期存." The English translation of this would be along the lines of "In a civilized society, tyrannical [WORD IN DISPUTE] will not survive for long." More about the "WORD IN DISPUTE" later.
• September 24, 2019: the Public Security Bureau of Dongzhi launched an investigation and summoned Zhang to the Nixi Police Station for questioning on suspicion that his post had constituted a disturbance of the peace (涉嫌寻衅滋事).
• November 22, 2019:  the Public Security Bureau of Dongzhi issued an administrative penalty notification to Zhang Zhixiang, informing him of the matters which would be subject to punishment, and asking him whether he wished to submit a statement and defense. Zhang stated he would not make a statement in his defense.
• November 23, 2019: the Public Security Bureau of Dongzhi issued an administrative penalty decision ordering Zhang to serve five days in administrative detention.
• January 13, 2020: Zhang filed an appeal with the People’s Court of Dongzhi, Anhui requesting the administrative punishment decision be revoked. 
• The People’s Court of Dongzhi rejected Zhang's appeal, so Zhang appealed again to the  Intermediate People's Court of Chizhou, Anhui, which also rejected his appeal.

So far there is nothing special about this case.  Arrest and imprisonment by police without trial or legal representation for insulting the Communist Party of China and its leaders is so commonplace that this case would normally not warrant any particular comment. Nor is it unusual for those who are jailed by the police for their speech to file an appeal in court. And they almost always lose. See, for example "At Least 10 People Convicted in China in 2019 for Twitter Posts that "Disturbed the Peace."

What makes this case noteworthy is Zhang's basis for requesting the courts revoke the Public Security Bureau's punishment. Here is how the People’s Court of Dongzhi summarized it:

Because the New Rural Cooperative Medical Insurance Company failed to reimburse plaintiff Zhang Zhixiang in a timely manner after he suffered from a malignant tumor of the right kidney, he posted inappropriate political statements like "In a civilized society, tyrannical  [WORD IN DISPUTE] will not survive for long" on the "B-Side Observation Group 1" (344 people in total) which was clearly illegal and constituted other acts of disturbing the peace. Plaintiff argued that the remarks he posted on the Internet had nothing to do with the governing party or government of China, and that what was online referred to the Republican government of the United States.

本案原告张志祥因患右肾恶性肿瘤后新农合医保未能及时报销，在“Ｂ彼岸观察１群”（共344人）的微信群里，发布了“文明社会，暴政的共匪不会长期存在”的不当政治言论，其行为明显违法，构成其他寻衅滋事行为。原告辨称其在网上发布的言论与本国政党政府无关，网上所指是美国共和党政府。

And here's how the Intermediate People's Court of Chizhou, Anhui summarized it (this time apparently with Zhang referring to himself in the first person):

I was referring to the current United States President and Republican Party leader Donald Trump's government's supporting "Hong Kong Independence" activists, damaging "One Country Two Systems," bring chaos to my China, and furthering the realization of global hegemonism. The statements I posted online had nothing to do with China's governing party or government, and what was online was referring to the United States Republican Party government. 

指的是现任美国总统共和党领袖特朗普政府支持“港独”分子，破坏“一国两制”，乱我中华，从而实现世界霸权主义。本人在网上发布的言论与本国政党政府无关，网上所指是美国共和党政府。

Zhang's argument had some basis, at least from a purely linguistic perspective. He was claiming that the word "共匪" refers to "Republican Bandits" and not "Communist Bandits." There no dispute that the second character "匪" refers to "bandits." So the only question is whether the first character "共" could possibly refer to "Republicans."  

As the screenshot below shows, in Chinese "Republican Party" and "Communist Party" share the same first character - "共." 

So the word "共匪" could, in theory, refer to either "Republican Bandit" or "Communist Bandit."

Unfortunately for Zhang, neither court was prepared to accept this argument. The odds were always against Zhang, because the term "共匪" has a long history of being used to refer to the Communist Party of China. Historical roots for the term "共匪" go back to the Kuomintang government in the 1920s, and Chiang Kaishek used that term several times in his book "Soviet Russia In China" - (苏俄在中国). 

Even today the term is censored on PRC websites. For example, this screenshot shows that Baidu will not even provide a translation for the term.

Baidu also tells users of its "Postbar" (Tieba) social media product who search for that term "Apologies, in accordance with relevant laws, regulations, and policies, related search results cannot be displayed." (抱歉，根据相关法律法规和政策，相关结果不予展现)

And searches for the term on Baidu's search engine only return results from websites under the direct control of the central government.

As for the judgment in Zhang's case, as of the posting of this article it appears to have been removed from the Supreme People's Court judgment database. As this screenshot shows, it was originally available at this URL: https://wenshu.court.gov.cn/website/wenshu/181107ANFZ0BXSK4/index.html?docId=0b19bd66a0024fc4a2bcabec004072a6.

Here is how that page appears now.

I have pasted the full text of the judgment below.

安徽省池州市中级人民法院

行 政 判 决 书

（2020）皖17行终31号

上诉人（一审原告）张志祥，男，1964年2月28日出生，汉族，住安徽省池州市东至县。

被上诉人（一审被告）东至县公安局,住所地安徽省东至县政务新区至德大道，统一社会信用代码113418210032868681。法定代表人陆骏，局长。

上诉人张志祥与被上诉人东至县公安局因治安管理行政处罚一案，不服安徽省东至县人民法院（2020）皖1702行初2号行政判决，向本院提出上诉。本院依法组成合议庭审理了本案。本案现已审理终结。

一审法院经审理查明：原告张志祥系安徽省池州市东至县泥溪镇河庙村王畈组村民，2019年1月25日因（右侧）肾恶性肿瘤在安徽医科大学第一附属医院住院治疗，2019年1月30日行腹腔下右肾根治性切除术，2019年2月4日出院。2019年9月23日池州市公安局网安支队在网安工作发现，原告张志祥以网民“东方不亮西方亮”在微信群称其近几日准备办出入证到香港去，并发表：“文明社会，暴政的共匪不会长期存在”等言论。池州市公安局网安支队将该涉嫌违法线索交由东至县公安局予以核查。2019年9月24日东至县公安局泥溪派出所接警后，以原告张志祥涉嫌寻衅滋事依法履行了受案、调查，并将原告张志祥传唤至泥溪派出所进行了询问。2019年9月25日，被告东至县公安局对原告张志祥涉嫌违法行为载体华为畅享8手机一部予以扣押保全。2019年9月26日被告东至县公安局在泥溪财政分局依法调取原告张志祥病情相关材料。2019年11月22日被告东至县公安局向原告张志祥作出行政处罚告知笔录，对拟处罚事项向其进行告知，并征询其是否提出陈述和申辩，原告张志祥在笔录上表示不陈述申辩。期间、因案情复杂，被告决定延长办案时间三十日。2019年11月23日被告东至县公安局作出东公（泥）行罚决字[2019]第698号行政处罚决定书，决定对原告张志祥予以行政拘留五日并于2019年11月24日向原告张志祥进行了送达。原告张志祥不服行政处罚决定书，于2020年1月13日诉至一审法院请求撤销东公（泥）行罚决字[2019]第698号行政处罚决定书。

一审法院认为，被告东至县公安局作为地方公安机关有依法维护辖区治安秩序的职责，对寻衅滋事行为作出治安处罚，是其享有的法定职权。《中华人民共和国治安管理处罚法》第二十六条规定：有下列行为之一的，处五日以上十日以下拘留，可以并处五百元以下罚款；情节严重的，处十日以上十五日以下拘留，可以并处一千元以下罚款：（一）结伙斗殴的；（二）追逐、拦截他人的；（三）强拿硬要或者任意损毁、占用公私财物的；（四）其他寻衅滋事行为。本案原告张志祥因患右肾恶性肿瘤后新农合医保未能及时报销，在“Ｂ彼岸观察１群”（共344人）的微信群里，发布了“文明社会，暴政的共匪不会长期存在”的不当政治言论，其行为明显违法，构成其他寻衅滋事行为。原告辨称其在网上发布的言论与本国政党政府无关，网上所指是美国共和党政府。但从原告的询问笔录、“悔过书”、手机存储器中提取电子数据的内容可以看出，原告辩解无任何依据可以支持，故对原告辩解不予采信。被告东至县公安局依据《中华人民共和国治安管理处罚法》的规定履行了受案、传唤、调查、询问、告知、裁决、送达等一系列法律程序，根据原告的违法情节轻重等因素综合作出对原告张志祥行政拘留五日，事实清楚、证据确实充分，适用法律正确，程序合法，处罚适当。综上，原告张志祥请求撤销东公（泥）行罚决字[2019]第698号公安行政处罚决定书的理由不能成立，一审法院不予支持。案经该院审判委员会讨论决定，依照《中华人民共和国行政诉讼法》第六十九条之规定，判决驳回原告张志祥的诉讼请求。案件受理费50元，由原告张志祥负担。

张志祥上诉称，上诉人于2019年9月24日以“东方不亮西方亮”的网民在“Ｂ彼岸观察１群”发布的言论、内容（21世纪现代文明社会，共匪不亡，天理不容）指的是现任美国总统共和党领袖特朗普政府支持“港独”分子，破坏“一国两制”，乱我中华，从而实现世界霸权主义。本人在网上发布的言论与本国政党政府无关，网上所指是美国共和党政府。故提起上诉，请求二审法院依法确认东至县公安局作出的东公（泥）行罚决字[2019]第698号行政处罚违法，适用法律错误并予以取消（撤销）。

东至县公安局答辩称，东至县公安局依法对上诉人张志祥作出的东公(泥)行罚决字[2019]698号公安行政处罚决定,认定的事实清楚,证据确实充分,适用法律正确,程序合法,量罚适当。东至县人民法院一审判决认定我局对张志祥的行政处罚事实清楚,证据确凿,适用法律正确,程序合法,量罚适当,请求二审法院予以维持,驳回上诉人上诉请求,以维护法律的严肃性。需要向二审法院做出说明的是在我局依法对张志祥的违法行为作出处罚后，上诉人张志祥感念东至县公安局泥溪派出所在办理该案过程中对其帮教,于2019年12月17日向东至县公安局泥溪派出所送锦旗一面。但上诉人张志祥在没有新的事实和理由及证据情况下,仅凭自己一时想法提起一、二审行政诉讼,根据最高人民法院印发《关于进一步保护和规范当事人依法行使行政诉权的若干意见》(法发[2017]125号)等法治精神,可以看出上诉人张志祥在没有新的事实与理由,针对同一事项反复、重复提起诉讼,其行为一方面扰乱了正常诉讼秩序,损害了司法权威,另一方面也挤占了有限的司法资源,加大了行政机关依法行政成本,属于典型的滥用诉权行为,不应得到法院支持。

东至县公安局向一审法院提交了下列证据：

1、受案登记表、受案回执，证明被告依法受案；

2、传唤证，证明被告依法传唤违法人员到案调查；

3、行政案件权利义务告知书、行政处罚告知笔录，证明被告依法履行告知义务；

4、证据保全决定书、清单、领条，证明被告依法扣押、返还物证；

5、调取证据通知书及清单，证明被告依法调取张志祥病例书证；

6、延长办案期限审批表，证明被告依照法定期限办理治安案件；

7、张志祥的陈述和申辩，证明张志祥就其违法事实进行了陈述和申辩的事实；

8、冯茂林、高玉芳的证人证言，证明张志祥实施违反治安管理行为的事实；

9、张志祥提供的微信个人信息、B彼岸观察1群截图及实施违反治安管理行为时使用的手机，证明张志祥实施违反治安管理行为的事实；

10、电子证物检验报告及提取的电子证据（详见光盘1张），证明张志祥实施违反治安管理行为的事实；

11、张志祥住院病历书证，证明张志祥因病住院治疗客观事实；

12、张志祥悔过书，证明张志祥实施违反治安管理行为的事实；

13、张志祥违法犯罪记录，证明张志祥在被被告依法做出行政处罚前我局暂未发现其有其他前科记录；

14、张志祥、冯茂林、高玉芳户籍身份信息，证明张志祥等三人身份；

15、行政处罚决定书，证明被告依法对张志祥作出行政处罚决定事实；

16、池州市局网安支队交办函，证明张志祥违法线索来源；

17、附相关法律法规，证明被告依法对张志祥作出行政处罚决定相关法律依据。

上述证据材料均随案移送本院，二审中双方均未提供新证据，一审法院对证据的审核与认定符合法律规定，本院予以确认。

本院认为，公安机关有依法对违反治安管理的违法行为进行行政处罚的法定职责。本案中被上诉人对上诉人通过网络发表不当政治言论，借故生非，污蔑和诋毁中国共产党和人民政府，扰乱社会秩序的违法行为，依法进行受案、传唤、查证、告知、处罚、送达等程序，对上诉人的违法行为作出行政处罚，认定事实清楚，适用法律正确，处罚适当，程序合法。上诉人上诉认为其在“Ｂ彼岸观察１群”发布的言论、内容指的是现任美国总统共和党领袖特朗普政府支持“港独”分子，与本国政党政府无关，其辩解与事实不符，其上诉理由不能成立。对上诉人此辩解一审判决已充分阐述不予采纳的理由，二审不再赘述。据此，依照《中华人民共和国行政诉讼法》第八十九条第一款（一）项之规定，判决如下：

驳回上诉，维持原判。

二审诉讼费用人民币50元，由张志祥负担。

本判决为终审判决。

审判长　桂　群

审判员　叶光氢

审判员　钱跟东

二〇二〇年六月二十三日

法官助理陈利华

书记员田玉

附相关法律法规：

《中华人民共和国行政诉讼法》

第八十九条人民法院审理上诉案件，按照下列情形，分别处理：

（一）原判决、裁定认定事实清楚，适用法律、法规正确的，判决或者裁定驳回上诉，维持原判决、裁定；

（二）原判决、裁定认定事实错误或者适用法律、法规错误的，依法改判、撤销或者变更；

（三）原判决认定基本事实不清、证据不足的，发回原审人民法院重审，或者查清事实后改判；

（四）原判决遗漏当事人或者违法缺席判决等严重违反法定程序的，裁定撤销原判决，发回原审人民法院重审。

原审人民法院对发回重审的案件作出判决后，当事人提起上诉的，第二审人民法院不得再次发回重审。

人民法院审理上诉案件，需要改变原审判决的，应当同时对被诉行政行为作出判决。

Court Upholds Man's 10 Day Detention for Insulting China's National Anthem on WeChat

Background of the "Wangxi Incident"

On the afternoon of January 2, 2019, two children, Lu Yi and Luo Zhiqiang (aged 8-9), were found dead near a small stream in the village of Wangxi, Xiaoshajiang Township, in Longhui County, Hunan.

On January 4, the Public Security Bureau of Longhui conducted an autopsy.

On January 5, the Public Security Bureau of Longhui announced that an investigation was ongoing, but that it had "essentially excluded homicide" as a cause of death.

On February 20, the Public Security Bureau of Longhui published a notice warning Internet users not to trust rumors about the case.

On February 28, the  Public Security Bureau of Longhui announced that the autopsy had determined that the children had frozen to death.

Relatives of the children did not accept the autopsy results, and the Public Security Bureau of Longhui engaged the Public Security Bureau of Hunan's Physical Evidence Appraisal Center to review the cause of death.

On March 29, the Physical Evidence Appraisal Center organized an expert group to go to Longhui to perform another autopsy, extract test materials and send them to the Hubei Tongji Forensic Medicine Forensic Appraisal Center for analysis.

On April 25, the Physical Evidence Appraisal Center issued its finding that it had ruled out the children's cause of death being due to mechanical injury, mechanical suffocation, conventional poisoning, poisoning, fatal disease, and drowning. Its forensic conclusion was that the children had frozen to death. Based on on-site investigations, investigation interviews, and post-mortem forensics, authorities concluded the children had taken off their clothes and bathed in the stream, causing the freezing water to kill them.

On May 13, the Public Security Bureau of Longhui issued a notice to relatives of the children informing them that no criminal activity had been found, and they would not be pursuing the case.

On July 25, the Public Security Bureau of Longhui issued a notice to relatives of the children that based on their investigation the children had died of natural causes, that there was nothing to indicate foul play, and their bodies had to be disposed of.

Sources:
https://xw.qq.com/partner/gdtadf/20190729A0BBR7/20190729A0BBR700
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/wrIKssx58rwXcDgB8yIz4Q
https://new.qq.com/omn/20190514/20190514A03IOT.html
https://www.weibo.com/ttarticle/p/show?id=2309404353896536522658

The following is a translation of a court judgment which arose as a result of a person posting his views about the "Wangxi Incident" on Tencent's WeChat platform. The case was brought by Liu Renwen. Police had ordered Liu to be held in detention for 20 days - 10 days for "disturbing the peace" and 10 days for "insulting the national anthem." Liu appealed to a lower court to revoke the punishment and lost. He then appealed to a higher court, which also rejected his appeal.  The translation below is of the appellate court's judgment rejecting Liu's second appeal.

Intermediate People's Court of Shaoyang, Hunan

Administrative Judgment

(2019) Xiang 05 Administrative No. 315

Appellant (plaintiff in the original trial) Liu Renwen, male, born on October 14, 1984, residing in Longhui County.

Appellee (defendant in the original trial) Public Security Bureau of Longhui, located at No. 1, Ping'an Street, Taohong Town, Longhui County.

Legal representative Shen Songneng is the director of that Bureau.

Entrusted agent Wen Jiewei is an instructor on the legal team of that Bureau.

Appellant Liu Renwen filed an appeal in the case of the public order administrative punishment of the Public Security Bureau of Longhui, and he did not accept the (2019) Xiang 0581 Administrative First Instance No. 101 Administrative Judgment rendered by the People's Court of Wugang, Hunan, and filed an appeal with this Court. This Court formed a collegial panel in accordance with the law and conducted a trial in this case. The trial has now concluded.

It was ascertained in the original trial that in March 2019, plaintiff Liu Renwen began to become aware of the death of two children in Wangxi, Xiaoshajiang Township, Longhui County (hereinafter referred to as the Wangxi Incident). Because he did not believe the police incident report issued by the police, he joined some WeChat group discussions of the Wangxi Incident (including "Volunteer's House," "Hengxin Public Welfare Friends Group," "Justice's House," "National Legions Fellowship Exchanges ⑥ Group," "Wangxi Status," "Dazhaodongkou Group," and "Chat 47 Group"), he set up a WeChat group "Volunteers ①" to discuss the Wangxi Incident, and from the beginning of May 2019 he used WeChat groups to advocate for 10,000 people to sign petitions.

On May 8, 2019, Liu Renwen posted the following in Wechat groups such as "Justice's House" and "National Legions Fellowship Exchanges ⑥ Group":

Regarding the murder case of the two brothers in Xiaoshajiang, Wangxi, modern officials only love wealth and sex, and inflict harm upon the world without reason. In terms of their character, the only thing they love is the money they have to spend! They have no fear of being cursed or punished as criminals, and are devoid of shame. I am a truly incompetent person. I only ask that those who understand the law and are capable to seek justice on behalf of the dead. .Strive for peace among peoples, stand upright for the citizens, . . . Strict and impartial laws, what protection should you afford murderers, of what crime would you convict those who would murder two children 7-8 years old?

On May 14th of the same year, Liu Renwen posted the following in the "Volunteers ①" group:

All the police officers participating in Wangxi (the self-inflicted stripping and freezing to death) are guilty of dereliction of duty, and their behavior can be likened to providing a protective umbrella for evil forces, those who would purge the world of evil things must crack down and punish it.

In addition, on May 9, 2019, Liu Renwen reposted lyrics of the national anthem which had been distorted by others in other WeChat groups.

On May 16, 2019, after the defendant Public Security Bureau of Longhui received the case, they questioned Liu Renwen in accordance with the law, initiated a related investigation, and served him a notice prior to imposing administrative punishment.

On May 17, 2019, the Public Security Bureau of Longhui issued the Long Public (He) Decision (2019) No. 0819 "Public Security Administrative Punishment Decision":

In accordance with the provision of Article 26 of the "Public Security Administration Punishment Law of the People's Republic of China" Liu Renwen is subject to 10 days administrative detention. In accordance with the provisions of Article 15 of the "National Anthem Law of the People’s Republic of China," Liu Renwen is subject to 10 days administrative detention. In accordance with the provisions of Article 161(1) of the “Procedures for Public Security Organs on the Handling Administrative Cases," it is decided that administrative detention on Liu Renwen shall run consecutively for 20 days.

Liu Renwen did not accept this, and filed an administrative lawsuit requesting that the Long Public (He) Decision (2019) No. 0819 “Public Security Administrative Punishment Decision” issued by the Public Security Bureau of Longhui be revoked.

The first instance judgment determined that because the plaintiff Liu Renwen did not believe the police incident report issued by the police he disseminated and fabricated false information about the Wangxi Incident and advocated for 10,000 people to sign a petition in the WeChat groups that he formed or participated in, which constituted an illegal act of disturbing the peace; in addition Liu Renwen reposted distorted lyrics of the national anthem in a WeChat group and this constituted an illegal act of insulting the national anthem by other means. Defendant Public Security Bureau of Longhui found that Liu Renwen's illegal behavior was clear and the evidence was reliable and copious. In the process of making the administrative punishment decision regarding Liu Renwen, the Public Security Bureau of Longhui conducted legal procedures such as case acceptance, investigation, and notification prior to administrative punishment. The procedures were lawful.

In applying the provisions of Article 26 of the "Public Security Administration Punishment Law of the People’s Republic of China," Article 15 of the "National Anthem Law of the People’s Republic of China," and Article 161(1) of the “Procedures of the Public Security Organs on the Handling Administrative Cases” to the administrative detention punishment imposed on Liu Renwen, the Public Security Bureau of Longhui applied the law correctly and imposed punishment appropriately.

In accordance with the provision of Article 69 of the "Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China," the court of first instance dismissed plaintiff Liu Renwen's lawsuit.

Appellant Liu Renwen appealed the first instance judgment claiming the facts were wrongly determined and requested the court of second instance revoke the original judgment and the Long Public (He) Decision (2019) No. 0819 “Public Security Administrative Punishment Decision."

Appellee Public Security Bureau of Longhui replied that with respect to the defendant's decision on administrative punishment the facts were clear and the evidence was reliable and copious, the procedures were legal, the law was applied correctly, and the degree of punishment was appropriate. The original judgment was correct and they requested the second instance court dismiss the appeal and uphold the original judgment.

The facts ascertained by this Court in the trial of second instance were consistent with the facts ascertained in the trial of first instance, and are affirmed by this Court.

This Court finds that appellant Liu Renwen disseminated false information in multiple WeChat groups which created a disturbance and disturbed the peace; he also reposted the distorted lyrics of the national anthem in multiple WeChat groups, insulting the national anthem, and these facts are confirmed by his own statements, witness testimonies, and WeChat chat records and other evidence. The facts are clear, and the evidence is conclusive.

Appellee Public Security Bureau of Longhui performed the procedures of filing, investigation, notification of punishment, decision of punishment, delivery, and notification of the family members of the detainee in accordance with the law, and the procedures were lawful.

The Long Public (He) Decision (2019) No. 0819 “Public Security Administrative Punishment Decision" issued by the Public Security Bureau of Longhui applied the law correctly when it subjected Liu Wenren to 10 days administrative detention in accordance with the provisions of Article 26 of the "Public Security Administration Punishment Law of the People's Republic of China;" subjected Liu Wenren to 10 days administrative detention in accordance with the provisions of Article 15 of the "National Anthem Law of the People’s Republic of China;" and decided that the administrative detention on Liu Renwen should run consecutively for 20 days in accordance with the provisions of Article 161(1) of the “Procedures for Public Security Organs on the Handling Administrative Cases."

The original judgment determined that the facts were clear, the laws and regulations were correctly applied, and the judgment result was not inappropriate. Liu Renwen’s request to revoke the administrative penalty decision and the original judgment is not sustained by this Court. Accordingly, in accordance with the provisions of Article 89(1)(i) of the "Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China," the judgment is as follows:

The appeal is denied and the original sentence is upheld.

The appeal fee for the trial of second instance of this case is 50 yuan, which shall be borne by appellant Liu Renwen.

This judgment shall be the final judgment.

Chief Adjudicator: Jiang Hongling

Adjudicator: Liu Zhaohui

Adjudicator: Yang Yaozhi

December 5, 2019

Judge's Assistant: Li Ping

Acting Clerk: You Xiaohong

Laws Cited:

National Anthem Law

Article 15. Anyone who, in a public venue, intentionally distorts the national anthem's lyrics or music, or sings the national anthem in a twisted or derogatory manner, or insults the national anthem in any other manner shall be subject to a warning or no more than 15 days detention. Where it constitutes a crime, criminal responsibility will be pursued in accordance with the law.

Public Security Administrative Punishments Law

Article 26. Anyone who commits one of the following acts shall be detained for not less than 5 days and not more than 10 days and may, in addition, be fined not more than 500 yuan; and if the circumstances are relatively serious, they shall be detained for not less 10 than days and not more than 15 days and may, in addition, be fined not more than 1,000 yuan:

(1) gang-fighting;

(2) chasing or intercepting another person;

(3) forcibly taking and obstinately seizing, or willfully damaging and occupying, public or private property; or

(4) other provocative acts.

Original Chinese Language Judgment Source: https://wenshu.court.gov.cn/website/wenshu/181107ANFZ0BXSK4/index.html?docId=f0a058553e40437d8c19ab28016b6dfe

刘任文与隆回县公安局治安行政处罚二审行政判决书

湖南省邵阳市中级人民法院

行 政 判 决 书

（2019）湘05行终315号

上诉人（原审原告）刘任文，男，1984年10月14日出生，住隆回县。

被上诉人（原审被告）隆回县公安局，住所地隆回县桃洪镇平安街1号。

法定代表人申松能，该局局长。

委托代理人文杰威，该局法制大队教导员。

上诉人刘任文因诉被上诉人隆回县公安局治安行政处罚一案，不服湖南省武冈市人民法院作出的（2019）湘0581行初101号行政判决，向本院提起上诉。本院依法组成合议庭，对本案进行了审理，现已审理终结。

原审查明，2019年3月，原告刘任文开始了解隆回县小沙江镇旺溪两名儿童死亡事件（以下简称旺溪事件），因不相信警方发布的警情通报，便加入了一些讨论旺溪事件的微信群（包括“志愿者之家”、“恒信公益朋友群”、“正义者之家”、“全国万人老乡交流会⑥群”、“旺溪情”、“大邵洞口群”、“聊天47群”），组建微信群“志愿者①”讨论旺溪事件，并从2019年5月初开始在多个微信群里倡议万人签名请愿书。

2019年5月8日，刘任文在“正义者之家”、“全国万人老乡交流会⑥群”等微信群发布“关于小沙江旺溪两小兄弟被害之命案，现代官家专爱财和色，伤天害理无人德。人格，只爱眼前有钱花！不怕断子绝孙受刑法，可耻无知，我是个实在无能之人。只敬请列为懂法、有才能义士为死者讨回公道。为世人争取平安，为国民声张正气，……严明的法律，请问你们保护杀人犯，连杀两名7-8岁的孩童该定什么罪”。

同年5月14日，刘任文在“志愿者①”群里发布“参加旺溪（自主脱衣冻死）的所有警察是渎职的，他们的行为符合黑恶势力保护伞的行为，属扫黑除恶的范畴，必须打击和严惩”。

另，2019年5月9日，刘任文将他人篡改的国歌歌词转发到其他微信群。

2019年5月16日，被告隆回县公安局受案后，依法询问了刘任文，进行了相关调查，并在行政处罚前进行了告知。

2019年5月17日，隆回县公安局作出隆公（荷）决字［2019］第0819号《公安行政处罚决定书》：“根据《中华人民共和国治安管理处罚法》第二十六条之规定，对刘任文行政拘留十日；根据《中华人民共和国国歌法》第十五条之规定，对刘任文行政拘留十日；根据《公安机关办理行政案件程序规定》第一百六十一条第一款之规定，决定对刘任文合并执行行政拘留二十日”。

刘任文不服，遂提起行政诉讼，请求撤销隆回县公安局作出的隆公（荷）决字［2019］第0819号《公安行政处罚决定书》。

原判认为，原告刘任文因不相信警方发布的警情通报，在本人组建或加入的微信群内散发、编造有关旺溪事件的虚假信息，倡议万人签名请愿书，已构成寻衅滋事的违法行为；刘任文在微信群里转发篡改的国歌歌词，已构成以其他方式侮辱国歌的违法行为。被告隆回县公安局认定刘任文的违法行为事实清楚，证据确实、充分。隆回县公安局在对刘任文作出行政处罚决定过程中，履行了受案、调查、行政处罚前的告知等法定程序，程序合法。隆回县公安局适用《中华人民共和国治安管理处罚法》第二十六条、《中华人民共和国国歌法》第十五条、《公安机关办理行政案件程序规定》第一百六十一条第一款的规定对刘任文作出的行政拘留处罚，适用法律正确，处罚适当。原审根据《中华人民共和国行政诉讼法》第六十九条的规定，判决驳回原告刘任文的诉讼请求。

上诉人刘任文上诉称，一审认定事实错误，请求二审法院撤销原审判决及隆公（荷）决字［2019］第0819号《公安行政处罚决定书》。

被上诉人隆回县公安局答辩称，被诉行政处罚决定认定事实清楚，证据确实、充分，程序合法，适用法律正确，量罚适当。原审判决正确，请求二审驳回上诉，维持原判。

本院二审查明的事实与一审认定的事实一致，本院予以确认。

本院认为，上诉人刘任文在多个微信群里散发虚假信息，起哄闹事，寻衅滋事；并在多个微信群转发篡改的国歌歌词，侮辱国歌的事实，有其本人陈述、证人证言、微信聊天记录等证据予以证实，事实清楚，证据确凿。被上诉人隆回县公安局依法履行了立案、调查、处罚告知、作出处罚决定、送达、通知被拘留人家属等程序，程序合法。

隆回县公安局作出的隆公（荷）决字［2019］第0819号《公安行政处罚决定书》，根据《中华人民共和国治安管理处罚法》第二十六条之规定，对刘任文行政拘留十日；根据《中华人民共和国国歌法》第十五条之规定，对刘任文行政拘留十日；根据《公安机关办理行政案件程序规定》第一百六十一条第一款之规定，决定对刘任文合并执行行政拘留二十日，适用法律正确。

原判认定事实清楚，适用法律、法规正确，判决结果并无不当，对刘任文要求撤销行政处罚决定和原审判决的请求，本院不予支持。据此，依照《中华人民共和国行政诉讼法》第八十九条第一款第（一）项之规定，判决如下：

驳回上诉，维持原判。

本案二审受理费50元，由上诉人刘任文负担。

本判决为终审判决。

审　判　长　　蒋红玲

审　判　员　　刘朝晖

审　判　员　　杨皞陟

二〇一九年十二月五日

法官　助理　　李　萍

At Least 10 People Convicted in China in 2019 for Twitter Posts that "Disturbed the Peace"

Following up on last week's post "Court Jails Man for 8 Months for Tweets That Harmed China's Image," below is a list of 9 other similar judgments.

Chen Guoji Criminal Judgment (陈国吉寻衅滋事一审刑事判决书), (2018) Ning 1321 Criminal First Instance No. 164, wherein the court found "Defendant Chen Guoji 'liked' and reposted false information and confusing videos that implicated the image of the State and insulted and defamed State leaders, and his actions are sufficient to cause severe chaos in public order, and constitute the crime of disturbing the peace, and should be punished."

Sentence: 2 year suspended sentence.

Source: https://wenshu.court.gov.cn/website/wenshu/181107ANFZ0BXSK4/index.html?docId=61aa44e0314a4bfba324aa3b00a6ae78

Wei Qi Criminal Judgment (魏琪寻衅滋事一审刑事判决书), (2019) Ning 0291 Criminal First Instance No. 146, wherein the court found "Defendant Wei Qi used information networks to insult others and spread false information on information networks under serious circumstances, he disrupted social order, and his actions constitute the crime of disturbing the peace."

The information "included over 100 posts with inappropriate speech content that was anti-Party and anti-Communist, and that insulted State leaders."

Sentence: 6 months imprisonment.

Source: https://wenshu.court.gov.cn/website/wenshu/181107ANFZ0BXSK4/index.html?docId=264806519c1242f282a0aa560021d4de

Yang Zhaoxing Criminal Judgment (杨兆星寻衅滋事一审刑事判决书), (2019) Yue 0605 Criminal First Instance No. 639, wherein the court found "Defendant Yang Zhaoxing spread false information on information networks that he clearly knew to be fabricated, incited trouble, and caused severe chaos in public order, and his actions constitute the crime of disturbing the peace."

The information included Twitter posts and reposts of "false information fabricated by foreign media regarding China's ruling Party, government regime, and State leaders."

Sentence: 10 months imprisonment.

Source: https://wenshu.court.gov.cn/website/wenshu/181107ANFZ0BXSK4/index.html?docId=d0b4f852e0fa4c4681b3aa5b00c1b74f

Xu Jianyu Criminal Judgment (许建榆寻衅滋事罪一审刑事判决书), (2019) Shaan 0802 Criminal First Instance No. 383, wherein the court found "Defendant Xu Doe repeatedly posted and reposted information on the foreign website Twitter that insulted, besmirched, and maliciously attacked Party and State leaders, the socialist system, police groups, and others, and he continued to post and repost this type of information even after he had subject to administrative punishment. The circumstances are severe, his actions severely disrupted social order, are an offense under the provisions of Article 293 of the "Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China," constitute the crime of disturbing the peace, and should be punished."

Sentence: 2 years and 6 months imprisonment.

Source: https://wenshu.court.gov.cn/website/wenshu/181107ANFZ0BXSK4/index.html?docId=8fbe1fe8c0164e7aa11caa2200c4affd

Dong Doe Criminal Judgment (董某寻衅滋事罪一审刑事判决书), (2018) Pu 0902 Criminal First Instance No. 342, wherein the court found "Defendant Dong Doe fabricated false information which he transmitted and spread on information networks, he incited trouble, damaged the image of the State, caused severe chaos in public order, and his actions constitute the crime of disturbing the peace."

The information included Twitter posts that "hyped up the Dong Yaoqiong ink splashing incident" and "inappropriate speech that spread rumors and besmirched and attacked the Party and the State."

Sentence: 8 months imprisonment.

Source: https://wenshu.court.gov.cn/website/wenshu/181107ANFZ0BXSK4/index.html?docId=e79d66abd4bc4ceb9515aac500f72d87

Cheng Doe Criminal Judgment (程某某寻衅滋事一审刑事判决书), (2019) Wan 0824 Criminal First Instance No. 110, wherein the court found "Defendant Cheng Doe used information networks to insult others, and besmirch the image of the Party and the State, under circumstances that were vile, and his actions constitute the crime of disturbing the peace."

Sentence: 10 months imprisonment.

Source: https://wenshu.court.gov.cn/website/wenshu/181107ANFZ0BXSK4/index.html?docId=9694db719f024150a90aaad80026a096

Ge Renqiang Criminal Judgment (葛仁强寻衅滋事一审刑事判决书), (2019) Ning 0291 Criminal First Instance No. 329, wherein the court found "Defendant Ge Renqiang spread a large amount information on information networks despite clearly knowing that it was false information that had been fabricated to insult and besmirch State leaders, he incited trouble, he caused severe chaos in public order, his actions constitute the crime of disturbing the peace, and should be punished."

Sentence: 6 months imprisonment.

Source: https://wenshu.court.gov.cn/website/wenshu/181107ANFZ0BXSK4/index.html?docId=9694db719f024150a90aaad80026a096

Gao Zhenqiang Criminal Judgment (高振强寻衅滋事一审刑事判决书), (2019) Ning 0304 Criminal First Instance No. 323, wherein the court found the following fact sufficient to convict the defendant of the crime of disturbing the peace: "From the time defendant Gao Zhenqiang applied for a Twitter account on May 18 2017 until June 11, 2019, his Twitter account with the name "Butterfly Flying" posted and reposted a total of 17,051 tweets, and of those over 80% included content that related to attacking the Party and the State and central Party and government leaders, which then received various amounts of hits and reposts, and between April 20 and June 11, 2019, Gao Zhenqiang published 39 posts that attacked State leaders.

Sentence: 6 months imprisonment.

Source: https://wenshu.court.gov.cn/website/wenshu/181107ANFZ0BXSK4/index.html?docId=1eab84577b524de6a56cab29002a09a7

Wang Beiyuan Criminal Judgment (汪北源诽谤一审刑事判决书), (2019) Yue 2071 Criminal First Instance No. 1881, in which the court found: "Even though the information posted by defendant Wang Beiyuan was not entirely comprised of harmful information that besmirched State leaders, smeared China's government, and denounced State policies, nevertheless he fabricated facts to damage the reputations of Party and State leaders, and the content of the defamatory information he spread on the Internet harmed the image of the State and State interests, and such circumstances should be considered severe."

Sentence: 1 year imprisonment.

Source: https://wenshu.court.gov.cn/website/wenshu/181107ANFZ0BXSK4/index.html?docId=75c5e923fd0d4232bcfaab2600f33e00

Court Jails Man for 8 Months for Tweets That Harmed China's Image

Original Chinese Language Source: Supreme People's Court "China Judgments Online" -  https://wenshu.court.gov.cn/website/wenshu/181107ANFZ0BXSK4/index.html?docId=cd7fedb4c6134ced8e08ab9d00b678f1

People's Court of Daxinganling Prefecture, Jiagedaqi District, Heilongjiang

Criminal Judgment

(2019) Hei 2701 Criminal First Instance No. 71

The public prosecution agency was the People's Procuratorate of Daxinganling Prefecture, Jiagedaqi District.

Defendant Jiang Kun, male, Han nationality, born February 8, 1983 in the Jiagedaqi District in the Daxinganling Prefecture of Heilongjiang Province, university education, no fixed occupation. Residing in the Jiagedaqi District in the Daxinganling Prefecture of Heilongjiang Province. On April 3, 2019, he was taken into administrative detention for this case. On April 17, 2019, he was taken into criminal detention by the Public Security Bureau of Jiagedaqi District on suspicion of committing the crime of defamation. On April 30, 2019, the District People's Procuratorate approved his arrest on suspicion of committing the crime of defamation, and on the same day his arrest was executed by the Public Security Bureau of Jiagedaqi District. He is currently being held in custody in the Jiagdachi District Detention Center.

The People's Procuratorate of Jiagedaqi District charged defendant Jiang Kun with committing the crime of defamation in Da Jia Procuratorate Prosecution Criminal Indictment [2019] No. 71, and filed a public prosecution with this Court on June 18, 2019. On September 29, 2019, the Procuratorate filed the Da Jia Procuratorate Prosecution Criminal Amendment [2019] No. 7 Amended Prosecution Decision charging defendant Jiang Kun with committing the crime of disturbing the peace. This court applied ordinary procedures in accordance with the law, formed a collegial panel in accordance with the law, and heard the case in closed court. The People's Procuratorate of the Jiagedaqi District appointed Deputy Procurator Wang Lianshan to appear in court in support of the public prosecution, and the defendant Jiang Kun was present in court to participate in the proceedings. The trial has now concluded.

The indictment of the People's Procuratorate of Jiagedaqi District charged defendant Jiang Kun with using wall-climbing software to browse the overseas website Twitter. Since 2014, Jiang Kun followed certain anti-China forces on Twitter. Because he often watched videos and read articles by overseas anti-China forces that attacked and vilified the Party and State leaders, he developed hateful thoughts about Party and State leaders. From 2014 to the present, Jiang Kun used computers and mobile phones to distribute, vilify, and attack Party and State leaders on his overseas Twitter account. There were a total of 1,434 posts with harmful information which harmed the nation's image, seriously jeopardized the nation's interests, and caused a negative impact internationally.

The amended Indictment Decision charged defendant Jiang Kun with using wall-climbing software to browse the overseas website Twitter. Since 2014, Jiang Kun followed certain anti-China forces on Twitter. He often watched videos and read articles by overseas anti-China forces that attacked and vilified the institutions and policies of the Party and the nation, and this caused him to develop hateful thoughts about the current social system. From 2014 to the present, Jiang Kun used computers and mobile phones log onto the overseas website Twitter to distribute, vilify, and attack the Party and the nation. There were a total of 1,434 posts with harmful information. Defendant Jiang Kun fabricated false information to attack the socialist system and national policies of the People's Republic of China, and he spread it on the Internet, causing severe disturbance to public order.

Following an investigation defendant Jiang Kun was apprehended by the Public Security Office of Jiagedaqi District in No. 2511 Tiedong Dajie on April 3, 2019.

The public security authorities undertook a psychological evaluation of defendant Jiang Kun in accordance with the law on July 19, 2019. The evaluation found that during the time period covering the case hat defendant Jiang Kun had the capacity to be held criminally liable.

The public prosecution agency alleges that defendant Jiang Kun fabricated false information to attack the socialist system and national policies of the People ’s Republic of China, and he spread it on the Internet, causing severe disturbance to public order, and that his actions constitute an offense under the provisions of Article 293, paragraph 1, clauses 3 and 4 of the "Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China," the criminal facts are clear and the evidence is reliable and copious, and that he should be held criminally liable for the crime of disturbing the peace. They provided corresponding evidence in court, and requested that punishment be imposed in accordance with the law. Defendant, Jiang Kun, admitted the facts of the crime charged by the public prosecution agency, and did not offer any justification.

It was ascertained at trial that since 2014, defendant Jiang Kun used wall-climbing software to browse the overseas website Twitter, and he followed certain anti-China forces on Twitter. During that time he often watched videos and read articles by overseas anti-China forces that attacked and vilified the institutions and policies of the Party and the nation, and this caused him to develop hateful thoughts about the current social system. From 2014 to the present, Jiang Kun used computers and mobile phones log onto the overseas website Twitter to carry out the spread of commentary and articles that vilified and attacked the Party and the nation. There were a total of 1,434 posts with harmful information, and defendant Jiang Kun fabricated false information to attack the socialist system and national policies of the People's Republic of China, and he spread it on the Internet, causing severe disturbance to public order.

Following an investigation defendant Jiang Kun was apprehended by the Public Security Office of Jiagedaqi District in No. 2511 Tiedong Dajie on April 3, 2019.

The public security authorities undertook a psychological evaluation of defendant Jiang Kun in accordance with the law on July 19, 2019. The evaluation found that during the time period covering the case hat defendant Jiang Kun had the capacity to be held criminally liable.

the aforementioned criminal facts have been confirmed by the following evidence which was provided by the public prosecution agency and examined in court and which has been affirmed by this Court.

1. Material evidence one desktop computer, one notebook computer, one mobile phone.

2. Documentary evidence including one Decision to Open a Case, one Apprehension Process, one Leads Bulletin, one evidence of household registration, one explanation by the Daxinganling Prefecture Office Public Security Bureau Cyber Security Detachment of the circumstances of the online collection of the Twitter network account, and one Online Collection Report from the Daxinganling Prefecture Office Public Security Bureau Cyber Security Detachment.

3. Defendant Jiang Kun's confession and justifications.

4. One Judicial Forensic Opinion.

5. One On-Site Inspection Record from the Public Security Bureau of Jiagedaqi District.

This Court finds that defendant Jiang Kun fabricated false information, which he broadcast, spread, and caused trouble with on the Internet, harming the image of the nation, and causing severe disturbance to public order. His actions constitute the crime of the disturbing the peace. The facts and offenses charged by the public prosecuting agencies have been established, and are hereby sustained by this Court in accordance with the law. After this began defendant Jiang Kun admitted his crime, expressed remorse, and it is therefore possible to impose a light sentence upon him. In accordance with the provisions of Article 293, paragraph 1, clauses 3 and 4 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 Regarding Certain Questions About Applicable Law When Dealing With Criminal Cases Whereby Information Networks are Utilized to Commit Defamation and Other Crimes," the judgment is as follows:

1. Defendant Jiang Kun committed the crime of disturbing the peace, and is hereby sentenced to a fixed term of imprisonment of eight months.

(The prison term is to be calculated starting on the day the judgment is executed, and each day in custody prior to the execution of the judgment shall count as one day of the prison term. Therefore it shall commence on April 3, 2019 and shall conclude on December 2, 2019).

2. The tools used in the commission of this case and transferred as part of this case are hereby confiscated and turned over to the State treasury.

If the defendant does not accept this judgment, he may within 10 days after the second day after receiving this written judgment bring an appeal through this court or directly to the High People's Court of Shandong.  A written appeal should be submitted with one original and two copies.

Chief Judge: Wang Yancheng
Adjudicator: Ma Guofeng
Adjudicator: Chen Hongyan

November 30, 2019

Clerk: Jiang Yanping

黑龙江省大兴安岭地区加格达奇区人民法院

刑 事 判 决 书

（2019）黑2701刑初71号

公诉机关大兴安岭地区加格达奇区人民检察院。

被告人姜坤，男，汉族，1983年2月8日出生于黑龙江省大兴安岭地区加格达奇区，大学文化，无固定职业，住黑龙江省大兴安岭地区加格达奇区。2019年4月3日因本案被行政拘留，2019年4月17日因涉嫌犯诽谤罪被加格达奇区公安局刑事拘留，2019年4月30日因涉嫌犯诽谤罪被加格达奇区人民检察院批准逮捕，同日由加格达奇区公安局执行，现羁押于加格达奇区看守所。

加格达奇区人民检察院以大加检诉刑诉[2019]71号起诉书指控被告人姜坤犯诽谤罪，于2019年6月18日向本院提起公诉。2019年9月29日以大加检诉刑变诉[2019]7号变更起诉决定书指控被告人姜坤犯寻衅滋事罪。本院依法适用普通程序，依法组成合议庭，不公开开庭审理了本案。加格达奇区人民检察院指派副检察长王连山出庭支持公诉，被告人姜坤到庭参加诉讼。现已审理终结。

加格达奇区人民检察院起诉书指控被告人姜坤常年使用翻墙软件，用于浏览境外推特网站，2014年开始姜坤在推特上关注一些反华势力，因其经常观看境外反华势力攻击污蔑党和国家领导人的视频、文章，使其对中国共产党和国家领导人产生了仇视思想。从2014年至今，姜坤使用电脑，手机在境外推特网账号散布、污蔑、攻击党和国家领导人。有害信息共计1434条，损害国家形象，严重危害国家利益，造成了恶劣的国际影响。

变更起诉决定书指控被告人姜坤常年使用翻墙软件，浏览境外推特网站。2014年开始，姜坤在推特上关注一些反华势力，经常观看境外反华势力攻击、污蔑党和国家有关制度和政策的视频、文章，因而对我国现行社会制度产生了仇视思想。从2014年至今，姜坤使用电脑、手机登陆境外推特网账号散布、污蔑、攻击党和国家的评论、文章，有害信息共计1434条。被告人姜坤编造虚假信息攻击中华人民共和国社会主义制度和国家政策，并在网络上散布，造成公共秩序严重混乱。

经侦查，被告人姜坤于2019年4月3日在铁东大街2511号平房内，被加格达奇区公安局抓获。

公安机关于2019年7月19日依法对被告人姜坤进行精神鉴定。经鉴定，被告人姜坤作案时具有刑事责任能力。

公诉机关认为，被告人姜坤编造虚假信息攻击中华人民共和国社会主义制度和国家政策，并在网络上散布，造成公共秩序严重混乱，其行为已触犯了《中华人民共和国刑法》第二百九十三条第一款第（二）、（四）项的规定，犯罪事实清楚，证据确实充分，应当以寻衅滋事罪追究其刑事责任。并当庭提供了相应的证据，请求依法判处。
被告人姜坤承认公诉机关指控的犯罪事实，未作辩解。

经审理查明，被告人姜坤自2014年开始，使用翻墙软件，浏览境外推特网站，并在推特上关注一些反华势力，同时观看境外反华势力攻击、污蔑党和国家有关制度和政策的视频、文章，因而对我国现行社会制度产生了仇视。从2014年至今，姜坤使用电脑、手机登陆境外推特网账号进行散布、污蔑、攻击党和国家的评论、文章。有害信息共计1434条，被告人姜坤编造虚假信息攻击中华人民共和国社会主义制度和国家政策，并在网络上散布，造成公共秩序严重混乱。

经侦查，被告人姜坤于2019年4月3日在铁东大街2511号平房内，被加格达奇区公安局抓获。

公安机关于2019年7月19日依法对被告人姜坤进行精神鉴定。经鉴定，被告人姜坤作案时具有刑事责任能力。

上述犯罪事实有公诉机关提供，经当庭质证查实，本院予以确认下列证据证实：

1.物证台式电脑机箱、笔记本电脑、手机；
2.书证立案决定书、抓获经过、线索通报、户籍证明、大兴安岭地区行署公安局网络安全保卫支队关于对推特网络账号网络在线提取的情况说明、大兴安岭地区行署公安局网络安全保卫支队网络在线提取报告书等；
3.被告人姜坤的供述与辩解；
4.司法鉴定意见书；
5.加格达奇区公安局现场勘查记录。

本院认为，被告人姜坤编造虚假信息，在网络上传播、散步、起哄闹事，损害国家形象，造成公共秩序严重混乱，其行为已经构成寻衅滋事罪。公诉机关指控的事实和罪名成立，本院依法予以支持。案发后，被告人姜坤认罪、悔罪，可以对其从轻处罚。依照《中华人民共和国刑法》第二百九十三条第一款第二、四项、第六十四条、《最高人民法院、最高人民检察院关于办理利用信息网络实施诽谤等刑事案件适用法律若干问题的解释》第五条第二款的规定，判决如下：

一、被告人姜坤犯寻衅滋事罪，判处有期徒刑八个月。

（刑期从判决执行之日起计算。判决执行以前先行羁押的，羁押一日折抵刑期一日。即自2019年4月3日起至2019年12月2日止）。

二、随案移送的作案工具联想牌笔记本电脑一部、黑白色台式电脑主机箱一台、诺基亚智能手机一部依法予以没收，上缴国库。

如不服本判决，可在接到判决书的第二日起十日内，通过本院或者直接向大兴安岭地区中级人民法院提出上诉。书面上诉的，应当提交上诉状正本一份，副本两份。

审判长　　王延成
审判员　　马国峰
审判员　　沈洪艳

二〇一九年十一月三十日

书记员　　蒋艳萍

PRC Court: Unauthorized Great Firewall Circumvention Services are Illegal Hacking Tools

According to a Henan court, during the summer of 2016, a man named Liu Bingyang started selling a VPN service based on software called "Shadowsocks" to people in China. The court found that Shadowsocks allowed users to "illegally access overseas websites, receive and view illegal videos, and receive and listen to illegal broadcasts." The court did not convict Liu of operating an unlicensed business or illegally operating a telecommunication service. Instead the Court sentenced Liu to three years imprisonment for violating Clause 3 of Article 285 of China's Criminal Law which provides:

Any person who provides programs or instruments used specially for penetrating into or illegally controlling computer information systems, or knowingly provides programs or instruments to another person for committing illegal or criminal acts of penetrating into or illegally controlling computer information systems shall, if the circumstances are serious, be punished in accordance with the provisions of the preceding paragraph.

The Court rejected Liu's defense that the service he provided only circumvented network monitoring programs, and that the services did not actually hack into or take control over any computer or server, and were not able to hack into the security of any computer information services.

The Court's judgement (original available on PRC Court website  here, translated below) made several references to "the monitoring of nation's Internet firewall" and "climbing the wall."

Criminal Judgment in the First Instance Trial of Liu Bingyang

People's Court of Xinye County, Henan Province

Criminal Judgment Document

(2017)Yu 1239 Criminal First No. 556

Public Prosecutorial Agency is the People's Procuratorate of Xinye County

Defendant Liu Bingyang, male, born April 13, 2993 in Xinye County, Henan Province, Han ethnicity, high school education, farmer, residing in Xinye County. Criminally detained by the Xinye County Public Security Bureau on March 30, 2016, and released on bail on April 1 of the same year. Bail was rescinded on October 13, 2017 following a decision by this Court. Currently at home.

Defense attorney Hai Fan of the Henan Sun Xiao Wei Law Firm.

On October 13, 2017 the People's Procuratorate of Xinye County filed an indictment with this Court pursuant to Public Indictment Document (2017) No. 324 charing the defendant Liu Bingyang with committing the crime of providing programs and tools to penetrate into and illegally control computer information systems. This Court accept the case on the same day, and formed a collegiate panel in accordance with the law, and convened public hearings in court. The People's Procuratorate of Xinye County assigned Procutorator Ma Shuhua to appear in court in support of the indictment, and the defendant Liu Bingyang and his defense attorney Hai Fan appeared in court to participate in the proceedings. Hearings have now concluded.

The Xinye County Public Procuratorate charged that during the summer of 2016, defendant Liu Bingyang utilized various websites including Ali Cloud, VULTR, RFCHOST, 50KVM, and SSCLOUD and used Alipay and Paypal to purchase and create proxy servers overseas and sold Great Firewall circumvention services to third parties. Defendant Liu Binyang used his a website of his own construction XX to distribute information about Shadowsocks software and download links, with users making payments to defendant Lin Bingyang through third party platforms such as Wechat and Alipay, Paypal, and UKOI. After users made purchases they could freely access foreign websites and videos. By the time this case was discovered, defendant Liu Bingyang had purchased and created a total of 55 overseas proxy servers, developed a total of 4,091 customers, and illegally obtained profits of 342,635 yuan (based on a conversion of rate of 6.90 yuan to the US dollar and 0.89 yuan to the Hong Kong dollar).

It has been determined that the "Shadowsocks" software and the services which the defendant illegally sold could circumvent the monitoring of our country's Internet firewall, and illegally access overseas websites, receive and view illegal videos, and receive and listen to illegal broadcasts.

The public prosecutorial agency provided evidence to this Court to prove the foregoing facts in the indictment. The public prosecutorial agency believes that defendant Liu Bingyang violated state regulations and provided programs for penetrating into  and illegally controlling computer information systems, that the circumstances are severe, and that his actions constitute the crime of providing programs and tools to penetrating into and illegally controlling computer information systems, and requests that he be punished in accordance with the law.

Defendant Liu Bingyang did not object to the crime charged in the indictment, but offered the defense that the software was downloaded from the Internet, and that all he was providing was a VPN network proxy service, and that the illegal gains included costs, and the purchase costs were 30-40,000 yuan.

Defendant Liu Bingyang's defense attorney maintains that the network service penetration that defendant Liu Bingyang provided was with respect to network monitoring programs, and that he did not intrude into or take control over any computer or server and was not able to penetrate into the security of computer information services, so his actions did not constitute the crime of providing programs and tools for penetrating and illegally controlling computer information systems. Further he actively cooperated with agencies in this case and exposed other criminals.

Based on hearings and investigations it has been ascertained that during the summer of 2016, defendant Liu Bingyang utilized various websites including Ali Cloud, VULTR, RFCHOST, 50KVM, and SSCLOUD and used Alipay and Paypal to purchase and create proxy servers overseas and sold Great Firewall circumvention [lit. "wall climbing"] services to third parties. Defendant Liu Binyang used his a website of his own construction XX to distribute information about shadowsocks software and download links, with users making payments to defendant Lin Bingyang through third party platforms such as Wechat and Alipay, paypal, and UKOI. After users made purchases they could freely access foreign websites and videos. By the time this case was discovered, defendant Liu Bingyang had purchased and created a total of 55 overseas proxy servers, developed a total of 4,091 customers, and illegally obtained profits of 342,635 yuan (based on a conversion of rate of 6.90 yuan to the US dollar and 0.89 yuan to the Hong Kong dollar).

It has been determined that the "Shadowsocks" software and services which the defendant illegally sold could circumvent the monitoring of our nation's Internet firewall, and illegally access overseas websites, receive and view illegal videos, and receive and listen to illegal broadcasts.

It has been further determined that on April 1, 2017, defendant Liu Bingyang handed over 230,000 yuan in illegal gains to the public security bureau, and on November 6, 2017 defendant Liu Bingyang handed over 70,000 yuan in illegal gains to the public security bureau.

Neither defendant Liu Bingyang nor his defense attorney Hai Fan contested any of the foregoing facts during the court hearing process, and the veracity of said facts are sufficiently confirmed by evidence such as defendant Liu Bingyang's deposition, the testimony of witnesses Jin Xin, Li Mou 1, Wang Mou 1, Wang Mou 2, Li Mou 2, Gao Mou, Gu Mou, Wang Mou, Zhang Mou, Liu Mou, Wang Mou 3, Tian Mou, and others, a review of bank card customer transactions, a review of Alipay Zhifubao, cell phones, laptop computers, Alipay Zhifubao receipts, lists of seized and returned items, as well as in-court appearances and proofs of residency.

This Court finds that defendant Liu Bingyang violated state rules and provided programs for the intrusion and illegal control of computer information systems, that the circumstance are severe, and that his behavior constitutes the crime of providing programs and tools for the intrusion into and illegal control of computer information services, and shall be punished in accordance with the law.

An examination of the defenses proffered by defendant Liu Bingyang and his defense attorney shows that the services provided by defendant Liu Bingyang had not been authorized by the relevant government agencies, avoided or penetrated computer system security defense measures, circumvented the monitoring of our country's Internet firewall, illegally accessed overseas websites, viewed illegal videos, and listened to illegal broadcasts. This Court therefore does not accept the defense proffered by defendant Liu Bingyang and his defense attorney that the defendant's actions did not constitute the crime of providing programs and tools for the intrusion into and illegal control of computer information services.

There is documentation showing that defendant Liu Bingyang wrote exculpatory materials after answering the summons, but no government agency has any proof, and there is no evidence proving, the defense attorney's contention that the defendant has helped expose the crimes of other criminals. This court therefore does not accept it.

After answering the summons defendant Lin Bingyang was candid about his criminal activity, and proactively handed over his illegal gains, in court his attitude in admitting guild was relatively good, and these factors have all been taken into consideration during sentencing. 

In order to strike at crime and safeguard the security of computer information systems, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 285(3), 67(3), 72(1)(3), 73(2)(3), 52, 53, and 64 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, it is the judgment of this Court that:

1. Defendant Liu Bingyang provided  programs and tools for the intrusion into and illegal control of computer information services, and is sentenced to three years imprisonment, suspended for five years, and fined 10,000 yuan. (Suspended sentence probation period to commence from the day this judgment is confirmed. Fine to be paid within three days after this judgment becomes effective.)

2. Illegal gains of 300,000 yuan to be confiscated and turned over to the state treasury.

If he does not accept this judgment he may submit an appeal to this court or directly to the Nanyang Intermediate People's Court within 10 days after the day after receiving this judgment. Written appeals should be submitted with one original and five copies.

Presiding Judge: Lu Qingwei
Judge: Zhao Qin
People's Assessor: Bao Hanju

November 9, 2017

Clerk: Liu Haizhou

刘冰洋一审刑事判决书

  

河南省新野县人民法院

刑 事 判 决 书

（2017）豫1329刑初556号

公诉机关新野县人民检察院。
被告人刘冰洋，男，1993年4月13日出生于河南省新野县，汉族，高中文化，农民，住新野县。因涉嫌犯非法经营罪于2016年3月30日被新野县公安局刑事拘留，同年4月1日转取保候审。经本院决定于2017年10月13日被取保候审。现在家。

辩护人海凡，河南孙晓伟律师事务所律师。

新野县人民检察院被以新检公诉刑诉（2017）324号起诉书指控被告人刘冰洋犯提供侵入、非法控制计算机信息系统程序、工具罪，于2017年10月13日向本院提起公诉。本院于同日立案，并依法组成合议庭，公开开庭审理了本案。新野县人民检察院指派检察员马书华出庭支持公诉，被告人刘冰洋及其辩护人海凡均到庭参加诉讼。现已审理终结。

新野县人民检察院指控，2016年夏，被告人刘冰洋通过互联网在阿里云、VULTR、RFCHOST、50KVM、SSCLOUD等网站，用支付宝和PAYPAL购买并搭建境外代理服务器向他人售卖翻墙代理服务。被告人刘冰洋利用自己建设的网站××发布shadowsocks软件信息及下载链接，用户购买时通过微信和支付宝、paypal、UKOI第三方平台向被告人刘冰洋付款，用户购买后可以自由查看境外网站和视频。截至案发，被告人刘冰洋共购买、搭建境外代理服务器55个，发展客户共计4091个，非法获利342635元（其中，美元汇率按6.90元、港币汇率按0.89元折算）。

经认定，被告人非法出售的“Shadowsocks”软件及服务，可以绕开我国互联网防火墙的监管，非法访问境外互联网站，收看非法电视、收听非法广播。

对指控的以上事实，公诉机关向本院提交了相应的证据予以证实。
公诉机关认为，被告人刘冰洋违反国家规定，提供侵入、非法控制计算机信息系统的程序，情节特别严重，其行为已构成提供侵入、非法控制计算机信息系统程序、工具罪，提请依法惩处。

被告人刘冰洋对起诉书指控的罪名均无异议，辩称软件是网上下载的，自己仅提供VPN网络代理服务，非法获利的数额还有成本在内，购买成本约三、四万元。

被告人刘冰洋的辩护人辩护认为，被告人刘冰洋提供的网络服务侵犯的是网络监管秩序，没有侵入或控制任何一台计算机及服务器，不能侵犯计算机信息系统的安全，其行为不构成提供侵入、非法控制计算机信息系统程序、工具罪；另外其积极配合办案机关，揭发其他犯罪分子。

经审理查明，2016年夏，被告人刘冰洋通过互联网在阿里云、VULTR、RFCHOST、50KVM、SSCLOUD等网站，用支付宝和PAYPAL购买并搭建境外代理服务器向他人售卖翻墙代理服务。被告人刘冰洋利用自己建设的网站××发布shadowsocks软件信息及下载链接，用户购买时通过微信和支付宝、paypal、UKOI第三方平台向被告人刘冰洋付款，用户购买后可以自由查看境外网站和视频。截至案发，被告人刘冰洋共购买、搭建境外代理服务器55个，发展客户共计4091个，非法获利30余万元（其中，美元汇率按6.90元、港币汇率按0.89元折算）。

经认定，被告人非法出售的“Shadowsocks”软件及服务，可以绕开我国互联网防火墙的监管，非法访问境外互联网站，收看非法电视、收听非法广播。

另查明，2017年4月1日，被告人刘冰洋向公安机关缴纳非法所得230000元，2017年11月6日被告人刘冰洋缴纳非法所得70000元。

上述事实，被告人刘冰洋及其辩护人海凡在开庭审理过程中均无异议，并有被告人刘冰洋的供述，证人金鑫、李某1、王某1、王某2、李某2、高某、贾某、汪某、张某、刘某、王某3、田某同等人的证言，银行卡客户交易查询、支付宝查询、手机、笔记本、支付宝截图、扣押、发还清单、到案经过及户籍证明等证据予以证实，足以认定。

本院认为，被告人刘冰洋违反国家规定，提供侵入、非法控制计算机信息系统的程序，情节特别严重，其行为已构成提供侵入、非法控制计算机信息系统程序、工具罪，依法应当受到惩罚。新野县人民检察院的指控成立，依法予以支持。被告人刘冰洋的辩护人的辩护意见，经查，被告人刘冰洋提供的服务，未经相关部门授权，具有避开或者突破计算机信息系统安全保护措施，绕开我国互联网防火墙的监管，非法访问境外互联网站，收看非法电视、收听非法广播，故对被告人刘冰洋辩护人辩护认为被告人行为不构成提供侵入、非法控制计算机信息系统程序、工具罪的辩护意见依法不予采信；在卷显示被告人刘冰洋到案后书写了揭发材料，但任何机关均未出具任何证明，无证据证实，故对辩护人认为被告人具有揭发其他犯罪分子的辩护意见依法不予采信。被告人刘冰洋到案后坦白犯罪事实，积极退缴违法所得，庭审中认罪态度较好，在量刑时均酌情予以考虑。为了打击犯罪，维护计算机信息系统的安全，依照《中华人民共和国刑法》第二百八十五条第三款、第六十七条第三款、第七十二条第一、三款、第七十三条二、三款、第五十二条、第五十三条、第六十四条之规定，判决如下：

一、被告人刘冰洋犯提供侵入、非法控制计算机信息系统程序、工具罪，判处有期徒刑三年，缓刑五年，并处罚金100000元。
（缓刑考验期自判决确定之日起计算。罚金限判决生效后三日内缴清。）

二、违法所得30万元予以没收，由收缴单位上缴国库。
如不服本判决，可在接到判决书的第二日起十日内，通过本院或直接向河南省南阳市中级人民法院提出上诉。书面上诉的，应当提交上诉状正本一份，副本五份。

审　判　长　　芦清伟
审　判　员　　赵　钦
人民陪审员　　鲍汉举

二〇一七年十一月九日

书　记　员　　刘海洲

Related Provisions from the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China

Article 285.   Whoever violates state regulations and penetrate into computer systems with information concerning state affairs, construction of defense facilities, and sophisticated science and technology is be sentenced to not more than three years of fixed-term imprisonment or criminal detention.

Any person who, in violation of State regulations, penetrates into computer information systems other than the systems prescribed in the preceding paragraph, or uses other technological means to obtain data stored in, or processed or transmitted by that computer information system, or conducts illegal control of that computer information system shall, if the circumstances are serious, be sentenced to a fixed term of imprisonment of not more than three years or criminal detention and be concurrently imposed with a fine, or shall be imposed with a fine alone; if the circumstances are especially serious, such person shall be sentenced to a fixed term of imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than seven years and be concurrently imposed with a fine.

Any person who provides programs or instruments used specially for penetrating into or illegally controlling computer information systems, or knowingly provides programs or instruments to another person for committing illegal or criminal acts of intruding into or illegally controlling computer information systems shall, if the circumstances are serious, be punished in accordance with the provisions of the preceding paragraph.

Article 286.   Whoever violates states regulations and deletes, alters, adds, and interferes in computer information systems, causing abnormal operations of the systems and grave consequences, is to be sentenced to not more than five years of fixed-term imprisonment or criminal detention; when the consequences are particularly serious, the sentence is to be not less than five years of fixed-term imprisonment.

Whoever violates state regulations and deletes, alters, or adds the data or application programs installed in or processed and transmitted by the computer systems, and causes grave consequences, is to be punished according to the preceding paragraph.

Whoever deliberately creates and propagates computer virus and other programs which sabotage the normal operation of the computer system and cause grave consequences is to be punished according to the first paragraph.

第二百八十五条　【非法侵入计算机信息系统罪；非法获取计算机信息系统数据、非法控制计算机信息系统罪；提供侵入、非法控制计算机信息系统程序、工具罪】违反国家规定，侵入国家事务、国防建设、尖端科学技术领域的计算机信息系统的，处三年以下有期徒刑或者拘役。

违反国家规定，侵入前款规定以外的计算机信息系统或者采用其他技术手段，获取该计算机信息系统中存储、处理或者传输的数据，或者对该计算机信息系统实施非法控制，情节严重的，处三年以下有期徒刑或者拘役，并处或者单处罚金；情节特别严重的，处三年以上七年以下有期徒刑，并处罚金。
　　
提供专门用于侵入、非法控制计算机信息系统的程序、工具，或者明知他人实施侵入、非法控制计算机信息系统的违法犯罪行为而为其提供程序、工具，情节严重的，依照前款的规定处罚。

第二百八十六条　【破坏计算机信息系统罪】违反国家规定，对计算机信息系统功能进行删除、修改、增加、干扰，造成计算机信息系统不能正常运行，后果严重的，处五年以下有期徒刑或者拘役；后果特别严重的，处五年以上有期徒刑。

违反国家规定，对计算机信息系统中存储、处理或者传输的数据和应用程序进行删除、修改、增加的操作，后果严重的，依照前款的规定处罚。
　　
故意制作、传播计算机病毒等破坏性程序，影响计算机系统正常运行，后果严重的，依照第一款的规定处罚。