Guo yunyun’s claim is not convincing.” 2、 Tongyuan company denied Guo yunyun’s identity as the actual constructor, but did not provide any evidence to prove his refutation, nor did it make a reasonable explanation for why he did not recognize the purpose of evidence, or even the statement was inconsistent.
（1） Guo yunyun had actual construction behavior in the project involving No.
The court of second instance wrongly identified the facts, resulting in the error of applying the law.
In addition to the above payment for concrete materials and engineering materials, Guo yunyun submitted 107 payment vouchers for materials and workers’ wages from September 5, 2013 to September 9, 2017 in the second instance, which stated “agreed to pay: Guo yunyun”.
During the construction, Guo yunyun, as “party a” and “Party B” (Huang Hongquan, Zhu Xiaolian, Wang Yongjun, Wang Dengli, sun Jianye, Guo Shiqian, etc.), successively signed the installation engineering agreement, carpentry agreement, exterior wall paint construction agreement, bricklaying agreement, scaffold agreement and reinforcement installation contract.
The certificate issued by Runtai company states: “the copy of the completion settlement meeting of buildings 1, 4 and 7 of Dongfang garden is consistent with the one retained by our company.
Respondent (plaintiff of the first instance and appellee of the second instance): Jiangsu Tongyuan Real Estate Development Co., Ltd., whose domicile is shikeguang rental house, No.
After the completion of buildings 1, 4 and 7 of Dongfang garden, Xuyi Runtai Real Estate Development Co., Ltd.
Huasheng Company should pay materials and workers’ wages only after Guo yunyun signs and agrees on the payment voucher.
The key word “check list” can be sent to the official account.
4 and No.
5, Wudun East Road, Xucheng Town, Xuyi county, Jiangsu Province.
Guo Shixiang is Guo yunyun’s uncle and employed by Guo yunyun to send and receive materials.
3、 As the actual constructor of the project involved in the case, Guo yunyun enjoyed the civil rights and interests of excluding compulsory execution with respect to the houses seized by the court.
[gist of judgment] 1.
If the source is incorrectly marked or infringes on your rights and interests, please inform us and we will delete it immediately.
On November 5, 2013 and November 12, 2013, Xuyi Jiulong building materials Co., Ltd.
1.
From the cross examination opinions of Tongyuan company on 107 payment vouchers submitted by Guo yunyun and the judgment documents of the court of second instance, the court of second instance simply adopted Tongyuan company’s claims without providing any evidence to prove it, ignoring the important facts of the internal contracting relationship between Guo yunyun and Huasheng Company, The evidence submitted by Guo yunyun to prove that he is the actual constructor is not recognized as “unconvincing”, and it is found that the facts are wrong.
We have sorted out the full text of the judicial interpretation and the 150000 word old and new comparison table, which can be shared on Baidu online disk for your convenience.
Legal representative: Tan Xiaodong, chairman of the company.
1.
617 of Jiangsu Higher People’s court and applied to this court for retrial because of the lawsuit against the executor’s execution applied by the respondent Jiangsu Tongyuan Real Estate Development Co., Ltd.
Guo yunyun and Huasheng signed two internal contracting agreements for construction projects on June 26, 2013 and December 7, 2013, which agreed that Huasheng Company would hand over the construction of buildings 1, 4 and 7 of Dongfang garden to Guo yunyun.
2.
As the project is an internal contracted project, the expenses such as materials and workers’ wages are directly paid from Huasheng Company to the relevant parties signing the agreement with Guo yunyun under the condition of Guo yunyun’s signature and approval, which does not violate the legal provisions.
Civil of the Supreme People’s Court of the people’s Republic of China Cut set Application for retrial (2021) Supreme FA min Shen No.
Guo yunyun has an internal contracting relationship with Huasheng Company.
（2） Guo yunyun actually participated in the signing and performance of subcontracts and subcontracts.
The new judicial interpretation of criminal procedure has just been released.
The minutes of the completion settlement meeting of buildings 1, 4 and 7 of Dongfang garden made it clear that the owner Runtai company owed 8.42876 million yuan for the project..
After accepting the case, the court formed a collegial panel for examination according to law.
Legal representative: Lu Huaiyang, chairman of the company.
5427 (defendant of first instance and appellant of second instance): Guo yunyun, male, born on February 28, 1989, Han nationality, lives in Xuyi county, Jiangsu Province.
The court of second instance ignored this fact and mistakenly held that “if Guo yunyun is the actual constructor, Guo yunyun should pay for materials and pay workers’ wages to each construction team, rather than Huasheng Company.
Guo yunyun participated in the settlement and his signature is true.” 2.
In addition, Guo yunyun paid Pei Changjun a total of 227699 yuan for concrete from August 23, 2015 to March 9, 2016.
Guo yunyun applied to the court for retrial in accordance with items 2 and 6 of article 200 of the Civil Procedure Law of the people’s Republic of China, saying that in the first and second instance, Guo yunyun submitted sufficient evidence to prove that he was the actual constructor of buildings 1, 4 and 7 of Dongfang garden, while the court of second instance ignored a series of evidence submitted by Guo yunyun, The wrong fact finding was made without examination and sufficient reasons, resulting in the error of the application of law.
7 buildings of the garden.
1, No.
（3） Guo yunyun was involved in the collection and payment of buildings 1, 4 and 7 of Dongfang garden.
(hereinafter referred to as Runtai company), the construction unit of the project involved in the case, held a “completion settlement meeting for buildings 1, 4 and 7 of Dongfang garden” with the construction unit, agreed on the completion settlement scheme and formed the meeting minutes, which Guo yunyun signed at the “construction unit” in the meeting minutes.
2.
The actual constructor generally refers to the natural person, legal person or other organization that makes separate settlement with the owner, affiliated unit and sub contractor after the project is completed and accepted by raising funds, organizing personnel and machinery for construction of relatively independent single project.
During the project construction, Runtai company paid Guo yunyun 740340 yuan for engineering materials from February 4, 2016 to July 21, 2017.
Guo yunyun, the retrial applicant, refused to accept the civil judgment (2019) suminzhong No.
This article is only for exchange and learning.
Entrusted agent ad litem: Gan Lin, lawyer of Beijing Long’an (Nanjing) law firm.
issued two copies of the delivery note, which was signed by Guo Shixiang.
Although the parties concerned submitted some construction agreements and other materials, they failed to provide the construction records, project visa, payment requisition, project payment request, monthly progress payment application form, material inspection application form, project acceptance form and other supporting materials generated in the construction process of the project involved in the case, so as to prove that they carried out construction, asked for payment and communicated with the owner, affiliated units If the sub contractor independently conducts project settlement and other facts, it cannot be identified as the actual constructor.
Guo yunyun raised funds by himself, organized construction personnel, equipment and materials to enter the site for construction, and actually performed two internal contracting agreements.
Entrusted agent ad litem: Wu Xiaojuan, lawyer of Beijing Long’an (Nanjing) law firm.
The case has now been examined and concluded.
Guo yunyun is responsible for the quality, progress and safety of the project, and on the contracting content, contracting mode, total contract price The economic indicators of the contractor and the rights and obligations of both parties are agreed.
Defendant in the first instance: Xuyi Huasheng Construction and Installation Engineering Co., Ltd., whose domicile is room a108, building 9, dongfangdu, Xucheng Town, Xuyi county, Jiangsu Province.
(hereinafter referred to as Huasheng Company) in the first instance.
(hereinafter referred to as Tongyuan company) and the defendant Xuyi Huasheng Construction and Installation Engineering Co., Ltd.
