China News Service, May 10. According to the WeChat public account of the Jiangxi Court, on May 10, 2022, the Intermediate People's Court of Ganzhou City, Jiangxi Province publicly pronounced the bribery case against Zhou Caijian, the former chairman of Jiangxi Construction Engineering Group Co., Ltd. , sentenced the defendant Zhou Caijian to 13 years in prison and fined 3 million yuan for the crime of accepting bribes; Zhou Caijian's bribery crime income and its fruits were confiscated according to law and turned over to the state treasury.
Zhou Caijian expressed his obedience to the judgment in court and did not appeal.
Sentencing scene
After the trial, it was found out that from 2002 to 2021, the defendant Zhou Caijian served as the deputy manager of Jiangxi Construction Components Company, the general manager of Jiangxi Fourth Construction Engineering Company, and the chairman of Jiangxi Construction Engineering Group Fourth Construction Co., Ltd., Jiangxi Province. Member of the Party Committee and Deputy General Manager of Provincial Construction Engineering Group Co., Ltd., Deputy Secretary of the Party Committee, Vice Chairman and General Manager of Jiangxi Construction Engineering Group, Secretary of the Party Committee and Chairman of Jiangxi Construction Engineering Group, etc. During their positions, they used the convenience of their positions to serve others. Seeking benefits, and taking advantage of the convenient conditions formed by their power or status, through the behavior of staff members in other countries, in order to seek illegitimate benefits for the trustee, illegally accepted property from 21 people including Zhang Moumou, equivalent to a total of 45.401136 million yuan.
The Ganzhou Intermediate People's Court held that the defendant Zhou Caijian's behavior constituted the crime of accepting bribes, and the amount of bribes was particularly huge and should be punished according to law.
In view of the fact that Zhou Caijian took the initiative to explain most of the criminal facts that were not known to the case-handling organ after he arrived at the case, truthfully confessed all his crimes, had frank circumstances, actively returned the stolen goods, and voluntarily admitted the guilt and accepted punishment, the punishment can be lighter according to law, so the above judgment was made according to law. .