Area code: 025
Postal code: 210036
Tel: 86451507
Chuanzhen: 86410258
Email: Not available.
Website: Temporarily unavailable.
Address: No. 3 Road, Xiangyang Industrial Park, Nanjing City, Jiangsu Province
Higher People’s Court of Jiangsu Province, People’s Republic of China
Civil Judgment
( 2002) Su Min San Zhong Zi No. 020
The appellant (defendant in the original trial) Changzhou Fahua Chemical Fiber Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Chemical Fiber Company) has its domicile at No. 115, Chang West Road, Changzhou City, Jiangsu Province.
Legal representative: Jiang, chairman of the chemical fiber company.
Agent: Cheng Hua, a lawyer at Quan Min'an Law Firm in Changzhou, Jiangsu.
The respondent (plaintiff in the original trial) Japan Jade Trading Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Japan Co., Ltd.) is domiciled at No. 2, Building 7, No. 14, Minami Town, Akashi City, Hyogo Prefecture, Japan.
The legal representative is Chen Junling, representative of Japan Co., Ltd.
Agent: Wu, a lawyer at Jiangsu Nanjing Fader Law Firm.
The appellant Chemical Fiber Company had a debt dispute with Nippon Co., Ltd. and was dissatisfied with the civil judgment (2001) of the Changzhou Intermediate People's Court of the People's Republic of China, and appealed to this court on February 24, 2001. On March 4, 2002, our court accepted the case and formed a collegial panel in accordance with the law. On April 4 and April 6, 2002, 11 held public hearings on this case. Cheng Hua, the authorized agent of the appellant Chemical Fiber Company, and Wu, the authorized agent of the appellee Japan Co., Ltd. attended the court to participate in the litigation. The case is now closed.
The Intermediate People's Court of Changzhou City, Jiangsu Province found the following facts after trial:
1.1996 10 On October 23, Nippon Co., Ltd. and Chemical Fiber Company signed a loan agreement, stipulating that Nippon Co., Ltd. US$400,000 to Chemical Fiber Company for three years (1996 11.098). Later, Nippon Co., Ltd. lent the money to the chemical fiber company. On April 27, 1997, Nippon Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company signed a share transfer agreement, stipulating that Hong Kong Fahua Company would transfer its 51% stake in Zhenhua Company to Nippon Co., Ltd. in full. On April 28, Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company signed another equity and debt transfer agreement. In addition to the above, the agreement also stipulates that Japan Co., Ltd. will transfer its US$400,000 creditor's rights in full to Hong Kong Fahua Company as a condition for the equity transfer. All previous agreements signed by the two parties are invalid, and there is no creditor or debt dispute between the two parties. On the same day, Japan Co., Ltd., Hong Kong Fahua Company, and Chemical Fiber Company signed a creditor's rights transfer agreement, stipulating that the three parties unanimously agreed that Japan Co., Ltd. would transfer the US$400,000 creditor's rights 1996 that it lent to Chemical Fiber Company on June 23 to Hong Kong Fahua Company; Japan The loan period originally agreed between Co., Ltd. and the Chemical Fiber Company remains unchanged. The interest in the second half of 1997 was US$25,000 in October 65438. The loan interest in 1998 and 1999 was paid by the Chemical Fiber Company to Hong Kong Fahua Company, and the repayment time remained unchanged. On the same day, Hong Kong Fahua Company issued a power of attorney. The main content is: The company authorizes Huang Xin to accept the US$400,000 creditor's rights of the former Nippon Co., Ltd. and Chemical Fiber Company in his own name. The principal and interest will all belong to him personally. He is hereby authorized. At the same time, a letter and telegram were sent to the chemical fiber company. The main content is as follows: Our company owes Huang Xin US$600,000, and the US$400,000 transferred by your company is now fully transferred to Huang Xin as a creditor's right. Huang Xin signed a loan contract with the chemical fiber company. After this contract comes into effect, our claims and debts with your company will be terminated immediately. On the same day, Huang Xin personally signed a loan contract with the chemical fiber company, stipulating that Huang Xin would lend the chemical fiber company US$400,000. The loan period was 2.5 years (April 28, 1997 to June 28, 1999), and the total interest in the first half of the year was US$25,000. The total interest for two years is US$40,000. The agreement was notarized by the Nanjing Second Notary Office, and a notarial certificate No. 544 of (97) Ning Erzhen Zijing was issued.
Afterwards, the Chemical Fiber Company and Nippon Co., Ltd. signed a creditor's rights and debts termination agreement on the same day, stipulating that due to the creditor's rights and debts relationship between Chen Junling of Nippon Co., Ltd. and Huang Xin of Hong Kong Fahua Company, the creditor's rights and debt relationship between the Chemical Fiber Company and Nippon Co., Ltd. was terminated in April. Terminates on 30th 1997.
2. In June 1998, because the share transfer agreement signed between Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company on April 27 and 28, 1997, was not approved by the Ministry of Foreign Economic Relations and Trade of China, nor was it reported to the original registration authority. The procedures for changing the equity and transferring shares violated the relevant provisions of the "Regulations on the Implementation of the Law of the People's Republic of China on Sino-Foreign Equity Joint Ventures" promulgated by the State Council. On August 18, 2000, the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court of Jiangsu Province ruled that the equity transfer between Nippon Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company on April 27 and 28, 1997 was invalid. On the same day, Nippon Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company reached a mediation agreement. The main content is: Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company paid US$400,000 to the Chemical Fiber Company, and interest of US$60,000 from April 30 to 10, 198, and June 30, 199, totaling US$460,000. Both parties receive US$230,000 each. Afterwards, Nippon Co., Ltd. appealed to the court of first instance on July 24, 2001.
3. On October 8, 2006, 5438 0, 1, Japan Corporation sent a letter to the Chemical Fiber Company, including a letter from Chen Junling, the legal representative of Japan Corporation, to the Chemical Fiber Company. The main content is that the case between Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company has been settled through mediation by the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court, with US$400,000 and US$60,000 being equally divided. Therefore, Japan Co., Ltd. hereby files a claim. Since Nanjing Jade Knitwear Co., Ltd., a subsidiary of Japan Co., Ltd., owes a debt to the Bank of China, it decided to transfer the creditor's rights of US$230,000 to Nanjing Jade Knitwear Co., Ltd. Mr. Zhou Shengjian contacted to resolve the claim for US$230,000. The contents of the letter are disputed by both sides. The chemical fiber company believed that Nippon Co., Ltd. had transferred the acquired creditor's rights to Nanjing Jade Knitting Co., Ltd., so it did not have the status of a creditor in this case, and requested to dismiss Nippon Co., Ltd.'s lawsuit. However, Nippon Co., Ltd. believed that in the letter, we The company only stated that the method of entrusting Mr. Zhou Shengjian of Nanjing Jade Knitwear Co., Ltd. to resolve the debt of US$230,000 was only an entrustment relationship and was not a transfer of the debt.
4. During the trial, the court of first instance investigated Huang Xin regarding the "Credits Transfer Agreement" signed by Hong Kong Fahua Company, Japan Co., Ltd., and Chemical Fiber Company on April 28, 1997. The creditor's rights were transferred to Hong Kong Fahua Company and later to Huang Xin personally. During the mediation process of the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court, Hong Kong Fahua Company returned half of the creditor's principal and corresponding interest received to Japan Co., Ltd. Huang Xin believed that Hong Kong Fahua Company was its sole proprietorship and transferred the creditor's rights to the company or Huang Xin Individuals are one thing. During the mediation, he was afraid that he would not get the money from the chemical fiber company, so he agreed that each company would pay half.
Based on the above facts, the court of first instance held that during the share transfer process between Nippon Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company, Nippon Co., Ltd. lent its US$400,000 claim to the chemical fiber company on June 23, 1996. Transferred to Hong Kong Fahua Company, as consideration for Hong Kong Fahua Company's equity in Zhenhua Company, the three parties also signed a creditor's rights transfer agreement. Later, because the share transfer between Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company was invalid, under the auspices of the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court, Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company voluntarily reached an agreement between April 30, 1998 and June 30, 1999. The debt was US$400,000 and the interest was US$60,000, totaling US$460,000. Both parties enjoyed an agreement of US$230,000. After the civil mediation document came into effect, Japan Co., Ltd. notified the Chemical Fiber Company 0 65438 on October 8, 2006, requiring the chemical fiber company to repay US$230,000. Dollar.
After receiving the letter, the Chemical Fiber Company raised no objection to the amount it should pay to Nippon Co., Ltd. According to the content of the letter, Nippon Co., Ltd. only entrusted Mr. Zhou Shengjian to contact and resolve the issue of handling the US$230,000, and did not transfer the creditor's rights. to Nanjing Jade Knitwear Co., Ltd. Therefore, regarding the Japanese Co., Ltd.’s request to order the Chemical Fiber Company to bear the interest of US$40,000 from November 1999 to the end of the trial of this case, the Chemical Fiber Company requested to dismiss the Japanese Co., Ltd.’s lawsuit. The court of first instance did not In support of the agreement, the chemical fiber company should pay US$230,000 to Japan Co., Ltd. The Nanjing Intermediate People's Court held that Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company were actually part of the money originally lent by Japan Co., Ltd. to the chemical fiber company. The loan violated the national foreign exchange regulations. Management regulations, in accordance with Article 108 of the General Principles of the Civil Law of the People's Republic of China, the chemical fiber company is ordered to repay US$230,000 to Japan Co., Ltd. within ten days from the date of entry into force of this judgment. The case acceptance fee of 265438 yuan 0, 265438 yuan 00 will be borne by Japan Co., Ltd., 65438 yuan 0, 8068 yuan will be borne by the chemical fiber company.
The appellant Chemical Fiber Company was dissatisfied with the original judgment and appealed:
1. The first instance found that Huang Xin’s claim against the appellant belonged to Hong Kong Fahua Company, which had no factual basis and violated legal provisions. The power of attorney issued by Hong Kong Fahua Company on April 28, 1997, the letter sent to the chemical fiber company, and the loan contract signed by Huang Xin personally with the chemical fiber company are sufficient to prove that the creditor's rights of Hong Kong Fahua Company against the appellant have been transferred to Huang Xin, and there is Notarized documents shall be the evidence. The first instance found that there was no evidence to prove that Huang Xin transferred the creditor's rights to Hong Kong Fahua Company, and it was obviously inappropriate to use Huang Xin's statement to determine that Hong Kong Fahua Company and Huang Xin were one and the same. Hong Kong Fahua Company and Huang Xin are different legal entities, and Huang Xin agrees that one person equals half. It is unclear whether Huang Xin is a natural person or the legal representative of Hong Kong Fahua Company with the right to dispose of the matter.
2. Some of the facts identified in the first-instance judgment were incorrect. (1) Two mediation documents with the same document number (dated August 1, 2000 and August 18, 2000 respectively) submitted by the original and defendant of the first instance to the Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court of Jiangsu Province (hereinafter referred to as the Nanjing Intermediate Court) are unknown. Which one is the effective legal document. (2) Judging from the Equity Transfer Agreement, it is not clear that the transfer of creditor's rights is a condition for the transfer of shares, and there is no basis for such determination in the first instance. (3) The actual loan relationship between Japan Co., Ltd. and the appellant occurred in 1993, and the loan agreement was signed on October 23, 1996. Before 1996, the appellant had paid interest to Japan Co., Ltd., and the appellant also returned the loan principal of US$120 to Huang Xin. (4) A letter from Nippon Co., Ltd. to the Chemical Fiber Company dated October 8, 2006 54 38. The content is the transfer of creditor's rights, not an entrustment relationship. (5) The court of first instance has no authority to determine the validity of the Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court’s mediation letter.
3. The first-instance acceptance of this case violated the litigation principle of “no action”. (1) The application for the case of Nanjing Intermediate Court against Nippon Co., Ltd. has been concluded, as evidenced by the effective civil mediation letter. Japan Co., Ltd. can apply for compulsory execution and add the chemical fiber company as the party subject to execution. (2) In this case, the application filed by Nippon Co., Ltd. is the same as the application pending before the Nanjing Intermediate Court. (3) The court of first instance has no authority to hear whether the mediation statement issued by the Nanjing Intermediate Court complies with the facts and law.
4. The Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court’s (1998) Ning Minchu Zi No. 294 Civil Judgment before the Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court’s civil mediation letter came into effect confirmed that US$400,000 was Huang Xin’s personal debt and made a disposition, so it should be upheld. res judicata of the civil judgment. Therefore, it requested that the first-instance judgment be revoked and the appellee’s claim be dismissed.
The main defense grounds of the respondent Japan Co., Ltd.:
1. The creditor-debtor relationship between Hong Kong Fahua Company and the Chemical Fiber Company has been confirmed by Huang Xin’s many conversations and mediation records, and also by Huang Xin’s many interviews and mediation records. The effective civil mediation letter signed by the specially authorized litigation agent of Hong Kong Fahua Company confirmed that Jiang, the legal representative of the chemical fiber company, did not deny the creditor-debt relationship between the Hong Kong company and the chemical fiber company.
When Japan Co., Ltd. sent a letter to the chemical fiber company through Nanjing Jade Knitwear Co., Ltd. requesting payment of US$230,000, the chemical fiber company did not raise any objection; the court of first instance seized the case of the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court and investigated and collected evidence from Huang Xin. Accordingly, the court of first instance determined that there was a creditor-debt relationship between Hong Kong Fahua Company and the Chemical Fiber Company, and Hong Kong Fahua Company agreed to share the creditor's rights with Japan Co., Ltd., which was legal and valid.
2. Even if the 400,000 yuan debt claimed by the Chemical Fiber Company belongs to Huang Xin, Huang Xin’s voluntary repayment of the debt as the property of Hong Kong Fahua Company does not violate the law, nor does it harm the Chemical Fiber Company or anyone else. The legitimate rights and interests must be legal and valid. As a debtor, the chemical fiber company has no defense.
3. The original trial procedure was legal. (1) The equity-debt transfer dispute case heard by the Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court is different from this case in that the litigants are different, the nature of the case is different, and the subject matter of the lawsuit is different. The court of first instance used the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court's civil mediation document and relevant trial records as evidence to confirm the creditor-debt relationship between Nippon Co., Ltd. and the chemical fiber company, and ordered the chemical fiber company to perform its debts. This was not a retrial of the previous case. (2) Because the chemical fiber company was not listed as a party in the lawsuit confirmed by the Nanjing Intermediate Court, and the mediation letter had no payment deadline, Japan Co., Ltd. did not apply for compulsory execution. However, after the original agreed creditor's rights expired, Nippon Co., Ltd. repeatedly requested the chemical fiber company to pay US$230,000. The chemical fiber company neither denies the debt nor pays it and sues Nippon Co., Ltd. This is Nippon Co., Ltd.'s right.
4. The letter sent by Japan Co., Ltd. to the chemical fiber company through Nanjing Jade Knitting Co., Ltd. does not mean to transfer the creditor's rights, but only has an entrustment relationship.
5. The chemical fiber company has paid US$6.5438 million to Huang Xin, which is another legal relationship and does not affect the outcome of this case. If Huang Xin requires the chemical fiber company to still perform at US$400,000 and interest, the chemical fiber company can defend against the mediation letter of the Nanjing Intermediate Court and the judgment of this case. Therefore, the court of second instance is requested to uphold the original judgment.
During the second instance, the two parties had no dispute over the following facts found in the first instance:
1.1996 10 On October 23, Nippon Co., Ltd. signed a loan agreement with the Chemical Fiber Company to lend US$400,000. Nippon Co., Ltd. fulfilled its payment obligations as agreed.
2. On April 28, 1997, Japan Co., Ltd., Hong Kong Fahua Company, Huang Xin, and Chemical Fiber Company respectively signed the "Share Claims Transfer Agreement", "Credits Rights Transfer Agreement", "Letter", and "Loan Agreement" ", "Claim and Debt Termination Agreement", and finally transferred the creditor's rights of US$400,000 to Huang Xin.
3. In June 1998, Nippon Co., Ltd. sued Hong Kong Fahua Company to the Nanjing Municipal Intermediate People’s Court on the grounds that the share exchange agreement signed with Hong Kong Fahua Company had not been approved by the relevant departments and the equity change procedures had not been completed. The People's Court requested that the equity transfer and the transfer of creditor's rights paid as consideration be invalid. The Nanjing Intermediate People's Court issued a civil ruling and civil mediation on August 18, 2000, confirming that Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company each claimed US$230,000 from the chemical fiber company (hereinafter referred to as the equity dispute case).
4.2006 54 38 0 65438 On October 8, Japan Co., Ltd. sent a letter to the chemical fiber company, requesting the chemical fiber company to return US$230,000.
We confirm the fact that there is no dispute between the parties.
The main focus of the dispute between the parties in this case is:
1. Whether Nippon Co., Ltd. legally obtained the US$230,000 claim against the chemical fiber company.
2. The relationship between Japan Co., Ltd. and Nanjing Jade Knitwear Co., Ltd. is an entrustment or debt transfer relationship.
3. Both parties provided the court of first instance with two civil mediation documents with the same document number produced by the Nanjing Intermediate Court in relation to the equity dispute case, one of which became effective.
4. Whether the original trial procedure is legal.
5. Whether the transfer of debt is a condition for the transfer of equity.
During the trial, the Chemical Fiber Company provided the following evidence to our court:
2. On April 3, 2002, the investigation transcript of Huang Xin by Cheng Hua, the agent entrusted by the Chemical Fiber Company, 2000 The Nanjing Intermediate Court's equity dispute case mediation letter was issued on July 18, 2018, to prove that Huang Xin did not agree to the transfer of creditor's rights.
2. The chemical fiber company has returned part of the principal and interest certificates to Huang Xin, proving that the total debt has been reduced.
(1998) Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court issued Ningminchuzi No. 294 Civil Judgment in the divorce case between Huang Xin and Cai Guoling, which was used to prove that Huang Xin had already The debt was disposed of.
Japan Co., Ltd. provided the following evidence to our court:
1. Nanjing Intermediate Court’s equity dispute case mediation agreement and mediation transcript.
2. Letter of attorney from Hong Kong Fahua Company as a litigation agent.
3. The litigation agent entrusted by Hong Kong Fahua Company signed the mediation letter and ruling.
The above evidence proves that Huang Xin has disposed of his creditor's rights, and the civil mediation letter from Nanjing Intermediate Court has been served in accordance with the law and has taken effect.
In view of the focus of the dispute between the two parties, combined with the evidence provided by both parties, and cross-examination and verification by this court, we have determined the following facts:
1. Huang Xin serves as the legal representative of Hong Kong Fahua Company person, participated in the hearing of the equity dispute case in Nanjing Intermediate Court, and signed the hearing transcript, cross-examination transcript, mediation transcript, and mediation agreement.
2. After the Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court issued the civil mediation letter on August 1, 2000, because Hong Kong Fahua Company did not agree to confirm that the equity transfer was invalid in the mediation letter, neither party signed for it. Later, on August 18, 2000, the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court made a new civil ruling and civil mediation document for both parties, and Wu, the authorized agent of the Japanese company, and Qiu Lianming, the authorized agent of the Hong Kong company, served the certificates respectively. Sign on. Chen Ping and Qiu Lianming, the authorized agents of Hong Kong Fahua Company, were authorized to "state the case, participate in debates, mediate, and collect legal documents."
3. The Chemical Fiber Company returned interest of 204,250 yuan to Huang Xin on May 5, 2000, 1997, 165570, 1998, 165438, and October 8.
4. Item 4 of the Civil Judgment No. 294 of Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court (1998) Ning Min Zichu, before Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court (1998) Ning Jingzi Chu No. 0364 came into effect, confirmed that “after the chemical fiber company’s claims were realized, Huang Xin Pay US$150,000 to Cai Guoling."
The court held that:
1. Whether Nippon Co., Ltd.’s US$230,000 claim against the chemical fiber company was obtained legally.
The US$400,000 creditor's rights involved in this case were first transferred from Japan Co., Ltd. to Hong Kong Fahua Company on April 28, 1997, and then transferred from Hong Kong Fahua Company to Huang Xin on the same day. Both parties recognized it. . On August 18, 2000, Huang Xin transferred the creditor's rights to Hong Kong Fahua Company and Japan Co., Ltd. as confirmed by the mediation letter of Nanjing Intermediate People's Court. Because: 1. As the legal representative of the Hong Kong Fahua Company, Huang Xin expressed his views during the hearing and mediation of the equity dispute case in Nanjing Intermediate Court, representing both the Hong Kong Fahua Company and Huang Xin himself. As a natural person with full capacity for civil conduct, Huang Xin should know the nature and consequences of his actions, and his intention to dispose of rights is true, does not violate legal provisions, and should be confirmed to be valid. 2. The chemical fiber company has returned part of Huang Xin’s principal and interest. The first two interest payments were for the period from April 28, 1997 to April 28, 1998 as agreed by both parties, and the latter principal payment could not be performed until the Nanjing Intermediate Court’s Equity Dispute Mediation Letter came into effect. The first two interest payments were the normal debt repayment behavior of the Chemical Fiber Company before Huang Xin agreed to transfer its creditor's rights again to Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company. The mediation letter of the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court was deducted when determining the total creditor's rights. The latter principal payment was performed by the Chemical Fiber Company after Nippon Co., Ltd. claimed its rights based on the mediation letter of the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court, and was performed in bad faith. The chemical fiber company cannot refuse to perform its repayment obligations to Nippon Co., Ltd. on this basis.
Therefore, the above-mentioned debt repayment behavior of the Chemical Fiber Company has nothing to do with Huang Xin's transfer of claims to Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company in the equity transfer dispute case, and Japan Co., Ltd.'s claim for US$230,000 against the Chemical Fiber Company based on the mediation letter of the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court. . When Hong Kong Fahua Company claims rights regarding the money that has been paid to Huang Xin, you can exercise the right of defense. 3. The civil judgment issued by the Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court on the divorce case between Huang Xin and Cai Guoling clearly stated that “after the chemical fiber company’s claims were realized, Huang Xin paid 65,438 yuan to 5,000 yuan to Cai Guoling.” The judgment only confirmed Huang Xin's payment obligation, and Cai Guoling did not directly claim credit against the chemical fiber company. Moreover, the US$230,000 debt obtained by the Japanese company did not exceed the total debt of the chemical fiber company, so the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court divorced the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court in the equity dispute case. Therefore, the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court held that the civil mediation documents issued by Japan Co., Ltd., Hong Kong Fahua Company, and Huangxin Company did not increase the debt burden of the chemical fiber company, did not infringe on the rights of the chemical fiber company and others, and complied with legal regulations. Both Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company have legally obtained claims of US$230,000. The appellant's appeal that "Huang Xin did not transfer his personal creditor's rights to Hong Kong Fahua Company, and Japan Co., Ltd. did not obtain creditor's rights of US$230,000" cannot be established and should be dismissed.
Second, the relationship between Japan Co., Ltd. and Nanjing Jade Knitwear Co., Ltd. is an entrustment relationship or a debt transfer relationship.
2001 1 8. The content of the letter from Nippon Co., Ltd. to the chemical fiber company clearly stated that "the claim of US$230,000 will be handed over to Mr. Zhou Shengjian of Nanjing Jade Knitwear Co., Ltd. to resolve the claim for US$230,000", which is a typical method trust relationship. The Japanese company remains a creditor for $230,000. As for the method of asserting rights, since the Nanjing Intermediate Court is hearing a confirmation lawsuit and there is no payment content, it cannot enter the enforcement procedure. The chemical fiber company is not a party to the mediation letter of the Nanjing Intermediate Court. When the claim for money from the chemical fiber company failed, Nippon Co., Ltd. separately sued the chemical fiber company for a debt of US$230,000, which was in compliance with the law. The appellant's appeal regarding "Japan Co., Ltd.'s transfer of US$230,000 of creditor's rights to Nanjing Jade Knitwear Co., Ltd." cannot be established and should be dismissed.
3. Regarding the Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court’s production of two civil mediation documents with the same number, which one is the effective legal document.
After the Japanese company and the Hong Kong Fahua Company reached a mediation agreement, because the Hong Kong Fahua Company did not agree with the content of the mediation, both parties did not sign the civil mediation document dated August 1, 2000 produced by the Nanjing Intermediate Court. The book has no legal effect. The Nanjing Intermediate People's Court re-produced the civil ruling and civil mediation document based on the opinions of the parties on August 18, 2000, signed by the agents authorized by both parties. As the specially authorized agent of Hong Kong Fahua Company, Qiu Lianming's signature is deemed to be the signature of Hong Kong Fahua Company. The civil ruling and civil mediation have been effectively served and are effective legal documents. Nippon Co., Ltd. obtained a debt of US$230,000 from the chemical fiber company based on the mediation letter.
4. Regarding the legality of the original trial procedure.
The Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court heard the equity and creditor’s rights transfer dispute between Japan Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Fahua Company, and the Changzhou Intermediate People’s Court heard the debt dispute between Japan Co., Ltd. and the Chemical Fiber Company. The subject of litigation, case facts, and litigation claims are different, and there is no problem of second instance in one case. Changzhou Intermediate People's Court investigated and cross-examined the mediation documents and court trial transcripts provided by the parties as evidence, which complied with the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Law. The appellant's claim that the original trial procedure was illegal cannot be established and should be rejected.
Verb (abbreviation of verb) Whether the transfer of debt is a condition for the transfer of equity.
Although Nippon Co., Ltd. and Chemical Fiber Company did not specify in writing that "the transfer of creditor's rights is a condition for the transfer of equity", based on the fact that both parties wrote the transfer of creditor's rights and the transfer of equity in the same agreement, and the rights and obligations of both parties to the contract were equal, According to the principle of fairness, the transfer of creditor's rights and the transfer of equity should be considered as conditions for each other. On the other hand, whether the transfer of creditor's rights and the transfer of equity are mutually conditional does not affect Huang Xin and Hong Kong Fahua Company's right to dispose of itself.
To sum up, based on the US$230,000 claim confirmed by the Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court’s civil mediation document, Nippon Co., Ltd. claimed the right to repay interest, and the chemical fiber company should fulfill its repayment obligations. The appeal grounds of the appellant Chemical Fiber Company are untenable and should be dismissed. The original judgment established the facts clearly and applied the law correctly and should be upheld. However, the original trial defined the cause of the case as a dispute over improper debt transfer, which should be corrected. The cause of action should be a debt dispute. In accordance with the provisions of Article 153, Paragraph 1, Item (1) of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, the judgment is as follows:
The appeal is dismissed and the original judgment is upheld.
The appeal case acceptance fee is 265438 yuan 0, 265438 yuan 00 yuan, which will be borne by the chemical fiber company.
This is the final verdict.
Chief Referee Tang Xiaofu
Judge Zhu Chunyan
Acting Judge Xu Meifen
April 10, 2002
Bookkeeper Chen Fanghua