200 blackmail letters bombed out executives of 4 listed companies. What kind of "private secrets" allowed them to make money?
Author: Miao Tour
What kind of "private secret" is it that makes the bosses of listed companies obediently make money and "have trouble"?
A man with a high school diploma pretended to be a journalist and sent 200 extortion letters on the grounds of exposing his personal privacy. As many as four listed company executives were "successfully recruited" and successfully extorted 1.34 million yuan in profit.
The extortion case of "fake reporters" occurred because an executive of another listed company reported to the public security organs.
Recently, China Judgment Documents Network published the first-instance verdict of the case, revealing more details.
The prosecutors allege that between the end of March and mid-April 2020, the defendant Fu Mouqing collected information (including names, addresses, photos of persons, etc.) of listed company executives and produced 200 blackmail letters for the purpose of extorting money.
The letter claimed to have the personal secrets of the recipient and coerced him to transfer RMB 335,000 or RMB 352,000 to the designated account.
It is reported that after 200 letters were delivered and mailed at the same time, Fu Mouqing successfully obtained a copy from Aopu Home Furnishing (603551.SH), Tailin Biological (300813.SZ), Guangda Special Materials (688186.SH), and Ruima Industrial (002976.SZ). The senior executives of the four listed companies each earned 335,000 yuan in extortion.
The chairman of Chengdu Xiandao (688222.SH) was asked for 352,000 yuan. The victim Li did not transfer the funds and reported the case to the public security agency.
The first-instance judgment of the Shuangliu District People's Court of Chengdu showed that Fu Mouqing was sentenced to ten years and six months imprisonment for the crime of extortion and a fine of RMB 150,000, and the extortion related money was refunded.
“I’m very surprised. I learned from a friend about this matter (extorted by extortion) about the company’s executives half an hour ago. I need to understand the specific case process and related details with the parties involved.” The secretary of the board of directors of the listed company involved in the case. In an interview with a reporter from China Business News, he said that he hadn't heard anyone mention it before and was completely unaware of the matter.
The person also told reporters that he fully respects the court's determination of the facts and judgments of the case, but it is still relatively rare that the court's judgment document does not deal with the victim's private information such as the company and position and makes it public. He has reservations about this. .
The reporter combed and found that the five companies involved in the case were all A-share companies that had just gone public in 2020. The time for the defendant Fu Mouqing to commit the crime from March to April 2020 was very close to the listing of these companies.
Among them, on April 17, 2020, the second day after Chengdu Pioneer landed on the Science and Technology Innovation Board, Chairman Li received a letter of extortion.
A week later, on April 23, Li reported to the public security organ.
On April 29 of the same year, Fu Mouqing was criminally detained by the Shuangliu District Bureau of Chengdu Public Security Bureau on suspicion of racketeering.
"From the time point of view, the companies that were successfully blackmailed were all just listed at the time. Such companies are more sensitive to the company's public opinion environment, executive information, etc., and are also one of the external environmental reasons that lead to successful criminal acts. "Guangqiang Law Firm senior partner Zeng Jie said in an interview with reporters.
It is worth mentioning that what has attracted the attention of the outside world is what kind of "private secret" is behind the extortion letter with a price of more than 300,000 yuan that makes the executives of listed companies obediently pay money and "have something"?
Zeng Jie's analysis pointed out that the most important thing in this case is why the defendant Fu was eyeing this crowd.
"First of all, most of the personal names and other information of these executives are public; secondly, for the sake of personal reputation and to prevent the occurrence of negative information, the black swan incident is trying to do more than less, and they dare not use legal forms such as reporting. Safeguarding one's own legal rights and interests also reflects that the current citizens' awareness of rights needs to be further improved. Some personnel in listed companies are too sensitive to relevant negative information and lack a complete process for legal public relations affairs." He said.