The consumption restriction order issued by Tianhe District of Guangzhou
China Implementation Information Open Network shows that Gao Xixi (namely Gao Xixi) has been recognized by Tianhe District People's Court as an executor of dishonesty. What are the definite obligations? The executor pays the applicant ***364284 12.63 yuan in one lump sum? Have the ability to repay but refuse to repay, so they are restricted from high consumption. At the same time, the shares of many companies under its name have also been frozen, and the amount of frozen shares is as high as 654.38+0.2 billion.
According to the consumption restriction order issued by Guangzhou Tianhe District People's Court against Gao Xixi, this case is a dispute application of Piyin Company. Red Star News checked the first-instance judgments of both parties, showing that in 20 15, Gao Xixi and Pi reached an investment gambling agreement, and Pi increased the capital of Century Company in Gao Xixi with 30 million yuan, with the aim of listing the company the following year. In fact, however, the goal has not been achieved. According to the agreement, Gao Xixi should return Pipi's investment funds and * * * 36 million interest. In the first trial, Gao Xixi argued that the fact of signing the agreement mentioned by the plaintiff should be confirmed. After the signing of the relevant agreement, the defendant has been actively trying to fulfill the contract, but due to market and other reasons, the defendant failed to reach the agreed goal within the agreed time limit. 2. The principal in the original application was confirmed, but it was considered that the amount related to interest calculation and liquidated damages was too high, and the adjustment was requested. After signing the agreement, Gao Xixi only paid 4 million yuan to Pi on October 30th, 20 19/KLOC-0, and the rest has not been paid.
Gao Xixi is currently the legal representatives of seven companies, including Horgos Hengxing Film and Television Culture Development Co., Ltd., Beijing Xingyi Oriental Cultural Industry Fund Management Co., Ltd., Changzhou Xixiang Universal Studios Co., Ltd. and Beijing Xingyi Oriental Cultural Technology Service Co., Ltd., among which Beijing Xingyi Oriental Cultural Technology Service Co., Ltd. was sued for a loan contract dispute and will hold a court session on February 3 this year.