【The Origin of the Case Facts】

A, with a low level of education, previously worked as a hotel hostess when she was young and is now a single mother of two young girls. Struggling to make ends meet due to unstable and meager income, A was diligent in managing her household finances. Recognizing this, her longtime friend B introduced A to work as an accountant for a call service station, with a monthly salary of 45,000 yuan. B assured A that she could work from home to take care of her young children, and A agreed.

However, unbeknownst to A, B was the leader of a fraudulent "call service" group. The group's modus operandi involved having a "call service secretary" make fraudulent calls to victims, followed by "withdrawal girls" collecting money from the victims at specified times and locations. The collected funds were then transferred to group members using various methods, and these members would task A with accounting work. Following B's instructions, A would transfer the money to unidentified individuals for remittance to mainland China.

Throughout this period, A believed she was simply working as an accountant for the call service station and had no knowledge of any fraudulent activities. She had no contact with the group members or the withdrawal girls and was even unaware of the details of her job, as her longtime friend B never disclosed any specifics. In the aftermath of the case, A found herself facing prosecution by the authorities. Due to financial hardship, she was unable to afford legal representation and initially had to rely on the attorney appointed by B, which led to her being ensnared in a wrongful conviction.

【A Roller Coaster of Judicial Decisions】

District Court: Guilty Verdict

In the first-instance judgment, A was concerned that if she ended up in prison, her two young daughters would lose their support, so she placed her trust in B, who was appointed as her attorney. However, she did not receive effective and substantive legal representation. During the preparation process, A's lawyer at the time, appointed by B, pleaded guilty on her behalf and constantly persuaded A to admit guilt without explaining the concept of "reckless intent" or other legal concepts to her. As a result, A was convicted of aggravated fraud in the first-instance judgment.

In the Court of Appeals: Guilty Verdict

Following the guilty verdict, A appointed our firm's attorney to file an appeal. In the appeal grounds, our attorney pointed out that the original judgment overlooked crucial facts, including that the members of the fraud group did not know A, A had no knowledge of the criminal activities, A's workplace was separate from the other defendants, and she received a fixed salary. Furthermore, it was highlighted that the attorney hired by A, who was also the mastermind B, acted against A's expressed intentions during the trial, and A did not receive effective legal representation. Our attorney actively requested an investigation of evidence, including the examination of crucial pieces of evidence, such as the surveillance CD and its translation, to repeatedly establish A's innocence.

Supreme Court: Remand for Re-trial

Although the second-instance judgment still found A woman guilty, the lawyers from our firm actively appealed to the Supreme Court on behalf of A woman. They successfully convinced the Supreme Court that the evidence relied upon in the original second-instance judgment was unrelated to A woman. The Supreme Court accepted the grounds for appeal presented by our firm's lawyers and recognized that the original judgment was in violation of legal requirements due to inadequacies. As a result, the original judgment has been revoked, and the case has been remanded to the High Court for further proceedings.

High Court Second Instance: Acquittal Judgment

With the diligent efforts of our firm's lawyers in presenting arguments for A woman's defense, the High Court has finally recognized that A woman was indeed unaware of the source of the funds, the operation and fraudulent methods of the "CALL客" group, and had no contact or involvement with any members of the group. The various pieces of evidence only indicated that A woman was engaged in accounting work. Based on the fact that A woman had no knowledge of the criminal activities of the fraudulent group, the guilty verdict against A woman has been revoked, and she has been acquitted. A woman and our firm's legal team are both elated by this outcome!

Supreme Court: Revocation and Remand Once Again

After the High Court's acquittal judgment, the prosecutor appealed, and astonishingly, the Supreme Court determined that A woman's confession during the first trial, under the persuasion of the lawyer appointed by the head of the fraudulent group, B woman, was made voluntarily. Furthermore, the Supreme Court found that the amount of money involved and the breakdown of accounts were disproportionate to the typical income of regular hotels and entertainment establishments, leading to a determination of A woman's uncertain intent to commit fraud. As a result, the Supreme Court revoked the acquittal judgment from the High Court and remanded the case back to the High Court.

High Court Second Instance: Second Acquittal Judgment!

Our firm's legal team persevered against the odds and redoubled their efforts, fueled by A woman's trust, in the legal battle for A woman's second-instance trial. They skillfully addressed the reasons provided by the Supreme Court and countered the prosecution's arguments with strong and favorable defenses. Their success led to the High Court's recognition of our firm's legal team's positions and resulted in the acquittal of A woman! After enduring six years of litigation, A woman can finally see the light at the end of the tunnel, sparing her from the pain of separation from her young daughter!