站内查询
您现在的位置是:主页 > 银河官网app下载 > 中國工程院院士李寧案一審宣判有期徒刑十二年
中國工程院院士李寧案一審宣判有期徒刑十二年
2020-01-06 23:33  www.taobaomir.com

  2020年1月3日,吉林省松原市中級人民法院公開宣判中國工程院院士、中國農業大學教授李寧及同案被告人張磊貪污一案,對被告人李寧以貪污罪判處有期徒刑十二年,并處罰金人民幣三百萬元,對被告人張磊以貪污罪判處有期徒刑五年八個月,并處罰金人民幣二十萬元;對貪污所得財物予以追繳,上繳國庫。

On January 3,2020, the Intermediate People's Court of Songyuan City of Jilin Province publicly sentenced the Chinese Academy of Engineering, Professor Li Ning of the Agricultural University of China and co-defendant Zhang Lei in the case of corruption, sentenced the defendant Li Ning to 12 years'imprisonment and a fine of RMB 3 million, sentenced the defendant Zhang Lei to five years and eight months'imprisonment and a fine of RMB 200,000 for embezzlement.

  經審理查明:自2008年7月至2012年2月,被告人李寧利用所擔任的中國農業大學教授、中國農業大學農業生物技術國家重點實驗室主任、中國農業大學生物學院李寧課題組負責人以及負責管理多項國家科技重大專項課題經費的職務便利,同被告人張磊采取侵吞、虛開發票、虛列勞務支出等手段,貪污課題科研經費共計人民幣3756萬余元,其中貪污課題組其他成員負責的課題經費人民幣2092萬余元。上述款項均被李寧、張磊轉入李寧個人控制的賬戶并用于投資多家公司。

From July 2008 to February 2012, the defendant, Li Ning, took advantage of his position as professor of the Agricultural University of China, director of the State Key Laboratory of Agricultural Biotechnology of the Agricultural University of China, head of the Li Ning Research Group of the College of Biology of the Agricultural University of China and the position of managing the funds for major national scientific and technological projects. The money was transferred to Li Ning's personally controlled accounts and used to invest in several companies.

  松原市中級人民法院認為,被告人李寧同張磊利用李寧職務上的便利,侵吞、騙取科研經費,數額特別巨大,李寧、張磊的行為均已構成貪污罪。鑒于近年來國家對科研經費管理制度的不斷調整,按照最新科研經費管理辦法的相關規定,結合刑法的謙抑性原則,依據李寧、張磊名下間接費用可支配的最高比例進行核減,對核減后的345萬余元可不再作犯罪評價,但該數額仍應認定為違法所得,故被告人李寧、張磊貪污數額為人民幣3410萬余元。在共同犯罪中,李寧系主犯,具有法定從重處罰情節,本案部分贓款已追繳,對李寧可酌情予以從輕處罰;張磊系從犯,且認罪悔罪,依法可對張磊減輕處罰。法庭遂作出上述判決。

The Songyuan Intermediate People's Court found that the defendant Li Ning and Zhang Lei used Li Ning's position to embezzle and defraud scientific research funds, the amount is particularly huge, Li Ning, Zhang Lei's behavior has constituted a crime of corruption. In view of the continuous adjustment of the management system of scientific research funds in recent years, according to the relevant provisions of the latest measures for the management of scientific research funds, combined with the principle of modesty of criminal law, according to the maximum proportion of indirect expenses at the disposal of Li Ning and Zhang Lei, the amount of 3.45 million yuan after the reduction may no longer be criminally evaluated, but the amount should still be regarded as illegal income, the defendant Li Ning, Zhang Lei embezzled more than 34.10 yuan. In the joint crime, li ning is the principal offender, has the legal heavier punishment circumstances, this case part of the stolen money has been recovered, li ning may be given a lighter punishment as appropriate; zhang lei is an accessory, and guilty of repentance, according to the law can reduce the punishment. The court then rendered the above-mentioned judgment.

  答:根據《中華人民共和國刑法》和最高人民法院、最高人民檢察院《關于辦理貪污賄賂刑事案件適用法律若干問題的解釋》的相關規定,“貪污或者受賄數額在300萬以上的,應認定為刑法第三百八十三條第一款規定的‘數額特別巨大’,依法判處十年以上有期徒刑、無期徒刑或者死刑,并處罰金或者沒收財產。”

A: According to the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China and the Interpretation of Certain Questions Concerning the Application of Law in Criminal Cases of Corruption and Bribery, the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate have interpreted the relevant provisions of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China.

  根據本案審理查明的事實,依據李寧、張磊名下間接費用可支配的最高比例進行核減后,被告人李寧、張磊貪污人民幣3410萬余元,屬于“數額特別巨大”量刑幅度。在共同犯罪中,李寧系共同貪污的主犯,具有法定從重處罰情節,本案部分贓款已追繳,對李寧可酌情予以從輕處罰。法院遂依法作出了上述判決。

According to the facts found in this case, according to the li ning, zhang lei's indirect expenses at the disposal of the highest proportion of the reduction, the defendants li ning, zhang lei embezzled more than 34.1 million yuan, belong to the \"particularly huge amount\" sentencing range. In the joint crime, Li Ning is the main criminal of joint corruption, with a statutory heavier punishment, the case has been recovered part of the stolen money, Li Ning may be given a lighter punishment as appropriate. The court then rendered the above-mentioned judgment according to law.

  答:被告人李寧、張磊貪污一案,經過兩次開庭審理,歷時五年。主要是涉及刑事法律的變化、2016年兩高司法解釋關于犯罪數額調整以及科研經費管理制度改革等幾個因素。

A: The defendants, Li Ning and Zhang Lei, were tried twice for five years. It mainly involves several factors such as the change of criminal law, the judicial interpretation of the two high levels in 2016 about the adjustment of the amount of crime and the reform of the management system of scientific research funds.

  ⑴《中華人民共和國刑事訴訟法》第二百零八條第一款、《最高人民法院關于適用中華人民共和國刑事訴訟法的解釋》第一百七十三條第二款的規定,對延長審理期限是有明確規定的。在案件審理期限屆滿前可依法報請審理法院的上級法院和最高人民法院批準延長審理期限,完全符合法律規定。

⑴《 Paragraph 1 of Article 208 of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China and paragraph 2 of Article 173 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China clearly stipulate the extension of the time limit for the trial. Before the expiration of the time limit for the hearing of a case, the higher court and the Supreme People's Court may, in accordance with the law, apply to the court for approval to extend the time limit for the hearing of the case, in full conformity with the provisions of the law.

  ⑵本案涉及科研經費的管理和使用,政策性較強。為更好服務國家科技創新戰略,最大限度保護科技人員的合法權益,法院在審理過程中一直重點關注相關科研經費管理和使用政策的變化,并對國家和中國農業大學關于科研經費管理方面的相關文件進行了認真研究,在判決時已充分考慮了上述因素。

⑵ This case involves the management and use of scientific research funds, with strong policy. In order to better serve the national strategy of scientific and technological innovation and protect the legitimate rights and interests of scientific and technological personnel to the maximum extent, the court has always focused on the changes in the relevant policies on the management and use of scientific research funds in the course of the trial, and has carefully studied the relevant documents of the state and the Agricultural University of China on the management of scientific research funds, and fully considered the above factors in the judgment.

  ⑶鑒于近年來國家對科研經費管理制度的不斷調整,按照最新的科研經費管理辦法的相關規定,結合刑法的謙抑性原則,對檢察機關指控的貪污事實,依據李寧、張磊名下間接費用可支配的最高比例進行核減,對核減后的345萬余元可不再作犯罪評價,充分體現了“從舊兼從輕”的司法原則。

⑶ In view of the State's continuous adjustment of the management system of scientific research funds in recent years, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the latest measures for the management of scientific research funds and the principle of modesty in the criminal law, the facts of corruption alleged by the procuratorial organs are reduced according to the maximum proportion of indirect expenses at the disposal of Li Ning and Zhang Lei, and the 3.45 million yuan after the reduction can no longer be criminally evaluated, fully reflecting the "old and lighter" judicial principle.

  3。問:李寧作為我國動物轉基因研究領域科學家的特殊身份及其曾作出的科研貢獻,對其定罪量刑是否有影響?

3. Q:Does Li Ning Ning, as a scientist in the field of animal transgenic research in China, has its special status and its scientific contribution to scientific research?

  答:李寧伙同張磊貪污一案,是國家審計署進行專項審計中發現交由最高人民檢察院依法查處,并經最高人民法院指定由吉林省松原市中級人民法院審理的重大、疑難、復雜案件。

Answer: Li Ning partnership with Zhang Lei embezzlement case, is the State Audit Office to carry out a special audit found by the Supreme people's Procuratorate to investigate and deal with according to law, and the Supreme people's Court appointed by the Jilin Province Songyuan City Intermediate people's Court to try major, difficult, complex cases.

  我國刑法明確規定:“對任何人犯罪,在適用法律上一律平等。不允許有超越法律的特權。”李寧作為中國工程院院士,對他因犯罪行為而被判處刑罰,我們也深感惋惜。但無論什么人,如果觸犯法律,都應依法追究刑事責任。任何身份都不能成為凌駕于法律之上或者法外開恩的借口。法院決定刑罰的時候,會根據犯罪的事實、性質、情節和對社會的危害程度,依照法律的規定,綜合考慮對其判處的刑罰。

The criminal law of our country clearly stipulates:\" All crimes committed against anyone are equal in application of the law. There is no privilege beyond the law. As a member of the Chinese Academy of Engineering, Li Ning also deeply regrets that he was sentenced to criminal punishment. However, whoever violates the law should be prosecuted for criminal responsibility according to law. No status can be an excuse for being above or outside the law. When deciding the penalty, the court will consider the penalty imposed on the crime according to the facts, nature, circumstances and harm to the society, according to the provisions of the law.

  答:國家科研經費管理制度近年來不斷修改和完善。隨著科研體制改革,國家對科研經費的管理和使用,作出了部分相對寬松的調整,允許項目結余經費在一定期限內由項目承接單位統籌安排用于科研活動的直接支出。但國家也一直在強化對科研經費的監督管理,第一,用于特定科研項目的國家科研經費,既不能擅自改變用途用于其他個人項目,也不允許利用國家科研經費為個人項目買單。第二,從開庭審理查明的事實和證據來看,李寧對其相關科研項目不存在投入自籌資金的情況,全部涉案資金均來源于國家財政下撥經費。所以,李寧的犯罪不能歸因于國家科研經費管理和使用制度的完善與否。第三,科研經費有嚴格的審批程序和管理要求。

A: The management system of the state scientific research funds has been continuously revised and improved in recent years. With the reform of the scientific research system, the state has made some relatively loose adjustments to the management and use of scientific research funds, allowing the project balance funds to be arranged by the project undertaking units for direct expenditure for scientific research activities within a certain period of time. However, the state has also been strengthening the supervision and management of scientific research funds.First, the state funds for scientific research for specific scientific research projects cannot be used for other individual projects without authorization, nor can the state funds for scientific research be used to pay for individual projects. Second, judging from the facts and evidence found in the trial, Li Ning does not invest self-financing in its related scientific research projects, and all the funds involved in the case are derived from the allocation of funds by the state finance. Therefore, Li Ning's crime cannot be attributed to the improvement of the management and use system of national scientific research funds. Third, scientific research funds have strict examination and approval procedures and management requirements.

  李寧的犯罪行為與科研經費管理制度沒有直接關系。截止目前,國家科研經費管理制度主要目的是支持科研,鼓勵科技創新,但是必須按照規定由單位統籌管理,而且有嚴格的審批程序,不能挪作他用,更不能套取。科研經費管理制度無論怎樣調整,監管原則都不允許個人中飽私囊。

  5。問:庭審中,李寧堅持認為自己的行為不是貪污,截留的經費是為了繼續進行科研活動,相關公司是為科研活動需要而設立的平臺公司。法院對此如何認定?

5。 Q: During the trial, Li Ning insisted that his behavior was not corrupt, the funds withheld were to continue scientific research activities, and the related companies were platform companies set up to meet the needs of scientific research activities. How does the court find this?

  答:國家下撥科研經費的主要目的是為科研活動的順利開展提供資金保障,進而促進科學技術的進步與發展。科研經費來源于國家有關部門,屬于財政資金,必須專款專用,科研經費劃撥給高校后,其屬性仍是國有財產,而不屬于課題負責人或課題組的個人財產,依據法律規定,侵吞、騙取科研經費的行為構成貪污罪。因此,科研經費的用途具有明確的專屬性,不允許任何人以任何名義、任何方式予以截留、套取,歸個人使用。

A: The main purpose of the state's allocation of scientific research funds is to provide financial guarantee for the smooth development of scientific research activities, and then to promote the progress and development of science and technology. Scientific research funds come from the relevant departments of the state, belong to the financial funds, must be earmarked for special purposes, scientific research funds allocated to colleges and universities, its attribute is still state-owned property, but not the personal property of the subject-in-charge or the research group, according to the provisions of the law, the act of embezzling and defrauding scientific research funds constitutes a crime of corruption. Therefore, the use of scientific research funds has a clear specificity and does not allow any person to withhold, collect or use them in any name or in any way.

  根據審理查明的涉案款的去向,李寧采取侵吞、騙取、虛開發票、虛列勞務支出等手段將涉案款項轉入其個人控制的銀行賬戶后,絕大部分被用于李寧個人投資公司或增資入股。涉案的北京全順捷達科技有限公司、無錫科捷諾生物技術有限公司等公司,截至案發時尚未從事任何科研活動。且上述公司既非中國農業大學設立或授權設立,也不屬于中國農業大學指定和核定的科研平臺,中國農業大學對上述公司的設立、投資均不知情。

According to the whereabouts of the money involved in the trial, the vast majority of the money was used to invest in Li Ning's personal investment company or to increase capital after it was transferred to its personally controlled bank account by means of embezzlement, fraud, false invoicing and false listing of labor expenses. The companies involved in the case, such as Beijing Quanshun Jetta Technology Co., Ltd., Wuxi Kejieno Biotechnology Co., Ltd., have not engaged in any scientific research activities up to the time of the case. And the above-mentioned companies are neither established or authorized by the china agricultural university, nor belong to the research platform designated and approved by the china agricultural university.

  本案涉案部分款項被個人占有。根據檢察機關當庭出示的王某證言,其系濟普霖、濟福霖兩家公司的臨時聘用司機,張磊曾讓其以個人名義開辦一張銀行卡,交由報賬員歐某專門用于收支賬外款。司機辭職后發現銀行卡存有60萬余元,因公司從未討要過這筆錢,故將該款用于購買理財產品和個人消費。

Part of the money involved in the case was held personally. According to the public prosecutor's testimony in court, his company's temporary employment of drivers, jip lin, jifolin, zhang lei has let it in his personal name to open a bank card, to a special account teller eu used to collect off-account funds. After resigning, the driver found that the bank card had more than 600,000 yuan, which the company had never asked for the money, so it was used to buy wealth management products and personal consumption.

  答:根據法庭審理查明的事實,李寧貪污款項,包括三部分,一是試驗后的淘汰動物及牛奶售出款,二是其本人名下和他人名下的課題經費結余款,三是其本人和他人名下課題的勞務費結余款。其中,李寧除貪污了其本人名下的科研經費外,還使用虛開發票223張的手段,套取了他人名下的大量科研經費2092萬余元,占套取總額的82%。檢察機關為此出具了報銷單據等書證、戴某等證人證言、鑒定意見及張磊的供述,認定上述事實的證據是確鑿的。

A: according to the facts found out in the court trial, Li Ning embezzled money, including three parts, one is the elimination of animals and cow milk sales after the test, the other is the balance of the project funds in his own name and others'names, and the third is the balance of the labor costs of his own and others'projects. Among them, in addition to embezzling his own scientific research funds, Li Ning also used the means of falsely issuing 223 invoices to obtain a large amount of scientific research funds in the name of others 20.92 million yuan, accounting for 82% of the total amount. The procuratorial organs have issued documentary evidence such as reimbursement documents, the testimony of a certain witness, the appraisal opinion and Zhang Lei's confession, and found that the evidence of the above facts is conclusive.

  答:《中華人民共和國刑事訴訟法》第五十五條規定:“對于一切案件的判處都要重證據,重調查研究,不輕信口供。只有被告人供述,沒有其他證據的,不能認定被告人有罪和處以刑罰;沒有被告人供述,證據確實、充分的,可以認定被告人有罪和處以刑罰。”庭審中,李寧雖然拒不認罪,但檢察機關出示了大量的證據,有同案被告人張磊明確穩定的供述,有李寧公司兩名報賬員以及其他多名證人證言,亦有套取經費的相關書證等,證據之間均可相互印證,而且與司法會計鑒定意見相吻合。法院遂依法作出上述判決。本案在審理中李寧拒不認罪,法庭尊重和保障了李寧及其辯護人的訴訟權利,充分聽取了李寧及其辯護人的意見。

A: Article 55 of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates:\" The sentence of all cases should emphasize on evidence, investigation and research, and not on confessions. Only the accused's statement, without other evidence, cannot be found guilty and punished; without the accused's statement, if the evidence is true and sufficient, the accused may be found guilty and punished.\" During the trial, although Li Ning refused to plead guilty, the procuratorial organs presented a large number of evidence, including the clear and stable confession of the defendant Zhang Lei, the testimony of two accounting officers of Li Ning Company and several other witnesses, and the relevant documentary evidence of obtaining funds, etc., the evidence could be mutually corroborated and consistent with the opinion of forensic accounting. The court then rendered the above-mentioned judgment according to law. Li Ning refused to plead guilty in the case, and the court respected and guaranteed the litigation rights of Li Ning and its defenders, and fully listened to the views of Li Ning and its defenders.

  答:本案于2019年12月30日依法公開開庭審理。庭審時,吉林省松原市中級人民法院邀請了全國、吉林省、松原市三級人大代表和政協委員,部分媒體記者,部分學術界代表和基層群眾旁聽了庭審。同時,被告人李寧及張磊的近親屬和所在單位中國農業大學的代表40余人在現場參加了旁聽。于2020年1月3日公開宣判。(央視記者奚丹霓)

A: The case was heard in public on December 30,2019. During the trial, the Intermediate People's Court of Songyuan City, Jilin Province, invited deputies to the National People's Congress at the three levels in Jilin Province and Songyuan City and members of the CPPCC Committee, as well as some media reporters, some representatives of the academic circles and the grassroots to attend the trial. Meanwhile, the defendant, Li Ning and Zhang Lei's close relatives and representatives of the unit's China Agricultural University, attended the scene. Public sentencing on January 3,2020. (CCTV reporter Xi Denyi)