(In order to protect the privacy of the parties, all parties in this article use pseudonyms. )
First, the original defendant's appeal
On April 20 14, Sun Lili sued the court, claiming that Sun Jinshan and I were in a mother-child relationship. Sun Jinshan came to my house on April 20 13, forcibly evicted me from my house and rented my house. Not only that, he also robbed me130,000 yuan of pension money. In order to protect his legitimate rights and interests, he filed an appeal with the court. 2. Sun Jinshan was ordered to return157,000 yuan to Sun Lili.
Sun Jinshan argued that he was imprisoned for crimes in 2003 and spent more than ten years in prison. 20 13 released from prison. After he got out of prison, I asked Sun Lili for a household registration book for my children, but she didn't give it to me, so I took a household registration book. One hundred and thirty thousand yuan is the alimony I asked Sun Lili to give me. When I was looking for the account, I saw 7000 yuan in the drawer, so I took it away because I needed it urgently. At that time, Sun Lili said I couldn't give it to you, but I said I borrowed it from Sun Lili. It is unable to repay the loan now. I also charged rent of 17000 yuan. I live in room 38 now. I used to live in my ex-wife's house, but now I'm divorced. I have nowhere else to live, so I can only stay in Room 38 for the time being.
The court of first instance held that
The legitimate rights and interests of citizens are protected by law. On the issue of vacating the house, Sun Lili is the owner of House No.38 and has the right to ask Sun Jinshan to return the house. Regarding the property issue, there is no evidence to prove that Sun Lili agreed to Sun Jinshan's payment. Sun Jinshan obtained Sun Lili property * * *150,000 yuan by illegal means, and Sun Jinshan should return it in full within the scope of possession.
The judgment of first instance is as follows: 1. Sun Jinshan vacated Room 38 and returned it to Sun Lili; 2. Sun Jinshan returned Sun Lili154,400 yuan; Three. Reject Sun Lili's other claims.
Appeal appeal
After the verdict was pronounced, Sun Jinshan refused to accept it and appealed to the Intermediate Court. Sun Jinshan thinks that Room 38 is his property, and Sun Lili has no right to ask him to vacate the house; Sun Lili didn't really mean to sue this case. She asked the court of second instance to change the judgment according to law and reject Sun Lili's claim. Sun Lili thinks that the first-instance judgment is legal and reasonable.
The court of second instance found out
Sun Lili is the owner of Room 38, and Sun Lili rents Room 38 to outsiders. Sun Jinshan admitted taking137,000 yuan in cash from Sun Lili's home. At the same time, Sun Jinshan actually collected the rent of Room 38, totaling 17000 yuan.
During the trial in our court, Sun Jinshan applied for witness Zhang Fei to testify in court, proving that House No.38 was owned by Sun Jinshan. Sun Lili thinks that the testimony of witness Zhang Fei is pure forgery.
Comment on Senior Real Estate Lawyer Jin Shuangquan
Jin Shuangquan, a senior real estate lawyer, believes that the parties have the responsibility to provide evidence to prove the facts on which their claims are based or refute the facts on which the other party's claims are based. If there is no evidence or the evidence is insufficient to prove the facts identified by the parties, the parties with the burden of proof shall bear the adverse consequences.
Sun Lili is the owner of house 38. As the owner of House No.38, Sun Lili enjoys the right to possess, use, benefit and dispose of House No.38 according to law. Sun Jinshan claimed that Room 38 was his personal property, but he could not prove that the property belonged to him. This statement has no legal basis. Because there is no basis for Sun Jinshan to occupy Room 38, Sun Lili advocates that Sun Jinshan vacate Room 38 according to law and should be supported.
The verdict is as follows:
Reject the appeal and uphold the original judgment.