A Shares Largest Breach Of Claim, Fuanna Shopping Fraud Exposure

< p style= "text-align: center" > img border= "0" alt= "align=" center "src=" /uploadimages/201311/29/20131129021033_sj.JPG "/" < < > >

< p > a few days ago, the Nanshan District court in Shenzhen publicly heard the case of "a href=" http://sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp "Shenzhen" fuanna home furnishings Limited by Share Ltd < /a > to claim the liquidated damages to 5 fuanna former executives such as Zhou Xichuan, Qu Jingchen and Mao Shanping, which made secret secret 5 years ago.

Before the listing, it was called "no drama", with a share price of 2.85 yuan per secret purchase, < a href= "http://sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp" > shareholder equity < /a >, and the stock price on the first day of listing was as high as 38 yuan.

Now, tell Xiaobian how much secret it is.

< /p >

< p > < strong > Event origin: A share is the largest, a href= "http://sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp" > Default claim > /a > /strong > /p >

< p > it is reported that as early as December 26, 2012, fuanna launched a lawsuit against 26 original shareholders, and sought damages of up to 81 million 210 thousand yuan, which is the largest claim for breach of contract in the A share market up to now.

Meanwhile, fuanna has also frozen the assets of 26 original shareholders through judicial means.

The 5 former executives belong to the 26 original shareholders.

< /p >

< p > according to fuanna's complaint, in March 20, 2008, former executives, such as a href= "http://sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp" and Zhou Xichuan /a, had issued a letter of commitment to fuanna. They promised to resign from the company in writing within 3 years from the date of signing to the company's initial public offering A shares and the listing date. At the same time, they made clear the calculation method of the liquidated damages, and clearly indicated that they had to pay liquidated damages within three working days after the lifting of the stock ban.

< /p >

On the day of P, Fu An Fang's attorney general directed at many executives who broke their contracts and left their jobs to rival companies.

The defendant's lawyer stressed that the resignation shareholders and fuanna company did not sign a competition restriction agreement, and the plaintiff agreed with each other, and the two sides agreed on the dissolution of the contract without breach of contract.

< /p >

< p > however, as the most critical evidence in this case, the authenticity of the above letter of commitment has become the most controversial issue in this case.

Zhou Xichuan and others questioned the authenticity of this letter of commitment delivered by fuanna as evidence material.

Former executive Zhou Xichuan said, "I have never signed this letter of commitment."

< /p >

< p > it is noteworthy that some informed persons pointed out that the time of filing the case was December 26, 2012, and the 28 day after the two day was the lifting of the ban on the original incentive stock.

If it is mentioned by fuanna, it is investigating the obligation of compensation within 3 days of the lifting of the ban. If it does not become a breach of contract before maturity, then it will be put on file when the original stock has not been lifted. Is this a common sense? Assuming that the letter of commitment is really true, once the account is frozen, the shareholders concerned will not be able to carry out the stock paction, nor can they pay the penalty for breach of contract. What is the intention of fuanna? < /p >

< p > for this doubt, fuanna did not respond positively.

< /p >

Less than P.

In the dispute with many original shareholders involved in the claim, fuanna was also exposed to many irregularities, including suspected concealment of major items and false listing. Major shareholders were suspected of controlling many small shareholders' stock and bank accounts, suspected of selling small shareholders' shares and stealing dividends, and taking illegal proceeds as their own.

< /p >

< p > < strong > buy back secret case: low price lure purchase equity to be premium > /strong > < /p >

< p > everything should start with a secret buyback.

< /p >

< p > in early January 2013, Wu Wenbin was stunned by the director of the company, deputy general manager, < a href= "http://sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp" > Chen Guohong < /a > long-distance telephone.

On the phone, Chen Guohong strongly lobbied the a href= "http://sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp" > Wu Wenbin < /a > back to Shenzhen. "I want to talk to me, give me some money, and improve the stock agreement before that."

Wu Wenbin originally worked as a purchasing director in fuanna, but he left the company in 2008 and went to Zhejiang.

< /p >

< p > Wu Wenbin felt strange when he put down the phone. Did he not buy shares back to the company when he left the company? How could he make money for himself?

So Wu Wenbin found out that in December 28th, when he announced the release of the restricted stock, he was still a shareholder, and the total number of shares was 30 thousand shares, and after two rights issues, he became 46 thousand and 800 shares.

< /p >

< p > according to the fuanna prospectus, the company adopted the resolution of the fourth provisional shareholders' meeting in 2007, and used 720 thousand and 900 shares of the company that had been repurchased to reward 22 key employees who met the incentive requirements.

Among them, Wu Wenbin at a price of 1.45 yuan per share, the pferee company 30 thousand shares.

< /p >

< p > Wu Wenbin recalled that in 2009, 3 months before the successful meeting of fuanna, fuanna, Hu Zhenchao, suddenly telephoned Wu Wenbin and told him that the listing of fuanna was out of the question. "Money pressure can not be taken out of it and become a dead money, so it is better to sell shares to the company".

So Wu Wenbin made a special trip to Shenzhen to deal with it.

< /p >

< p > according to Wu Wenbin, on the day of June 12, 2009, when fuanna listed the audit period, Fu An company's secretaries, a href= "http://sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp" > Hu Zhenchao < /a >, was assigned by the company under the company's deception to falsely claim that the company was listed on the market, and signed a share pfer agreement with the private sector. It bought the fuanna shares held by Wu Wenbin directly with cash at the price of two yuan and 80 Fen yuan per share.

< /p >

< p > allegedly, this only one repurchase agreement has been unilaterally taken away by fuanna.

At the same time, Wu Wenbin was asked to hand over all shareholder cards, stock accounts and related bank cards to Hu Zhenchao.

For Wu Wenbin's stock repurchase, fuanna did not register with shareholders in the industry and Commerce Bureau, nor did he disclose any information in subsequent announcements. In the IPO document of fuanna, Wu Wenbin remained a shareholder.

< /p >

< p > Wu Wenbin found himself on the market only after three months of share pfer.

In September 7, 2009, the SFC passed the IPO of fuanna.

On the first day of listing, the price of fuanna shares is as high as 38 yuan / share, which is higher than Wu Wenbin's pfer price more than 10 times.

< /p >

P > strong > Listing involved: 20 people's ownership change did not disclose {page_break} < /strong > /p >

After < p > 4 years, a href= "http://sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp" > Wu Wenbin < /a > return to Shenzhen to contact fuanna.

However, Chen Guohong did not show up this time, but sent a lawyer to receive it.

As soon as the lawyer met, he told Wu Wenbin that he could reinvest 2 yuan per share as long as he had completed the procedure.

However, at that time, fuanna's share price stabilized at about 35 yuan / share, which was rejected by Wu Wenbin.

< /p >

< p >, then Wu Wenbin went to the securities company to check accounts and found out that the 468 million shares under his name had been sold out in from January 4th to 13th before he rushed to Shenzhen.

What is even more bizarre is that in the same few days, the shares sold without Wu Wenbin's consent were pferred to the ICBC's account through the bank card pfer, and then they were all taken away through pfers, ATM pactions, counter pactions and POS consumption. The total number was nearly 1 million 500 thousand yuan, and the highest consumption of one brush card appeared in January 12th, and the total cost was 100 thousand yuan.

< /p >

< p > in Wu Wenbin's view, the person who violating the rules of "a href=" http://sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp "> stock > /a" and stealing her property is Chen Guohong.

Because the person who holds the information of bank, account and so on, and can operate so many things is only the company.

However, Chen Guohong denied that he had mastered the account number of Wu Wenbin and sold it.

Hu Zhenchao admitted that he had collected Wu Wenbin's shareholder card, stock account and bank card, and gave them to Chen Guohong.

< /p >

Wu Wenbin's case is not an isolated case. Before joining the regional sales director Yang Bo and former employee Yang Haiyan, he told reporters that the original stock held in his hands was deceived by the company's hopeless market before listing, and was repurchased by the company at the price of two or three yuan. The account and bank card were forced to hand in, the agreement was taken away from the documents, and no evidence was left in their hands.

< /p >

< p > "if there is no repurchase, why do we have to reconnect with the former staff for three or four years before the lifting of the ban?"

Obviously, there are loopholes in the repurchase. "

Yang Boru is called.

According to people familiar with the matter, 20 of the 26 original shareholders were involved in the company's Secret buyback plan, and until the restricted sale day, the group was still declared a shareholder of the company.

< /p >

< p > Sun Jun, lawyer of Guangdong Yi Yan law firm, thinks that the listed company has the obligation to disclose the details of the change of the major shareholding, and if it does exist, it will be a violation of the securities.

The change of stock ownership is not reflected in IPO material, and it is suspected of being false.

< /p >

< p > < strong > leaving the company: letter of commitment "pursue and kill" resignation senior executive < /strong > /p >

< p > on the one hand, since December 26, 2012, fuanna has launched a breach of contract for 26 "a href=" http://sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp "original stock" /a "East, and has frozen the assets of the involved personnel through judicial means.

But on the other hand, fuanna also worked closely with the departing executives at the same time, demanding that they return to the company to complete the formalities, and that they could pay an additional fee.

< /p >

"P", "fuanna is most afraid of secret repurchase, as long as it is sitting, that is a false listing of major events.

So even if the previous buyback was white, fuanna wouldn't admit it.

In Zhou Xichuan's opinion, fuanna had been planning for many years, and the ultimate goal was to kill the bull and not to let the shares fall into the hands of any "outsiders".

On behalf of the shareholders, although they have large holdings, they have difficulties in exercising their rights and can not arbitrarily manipulate their stocks. Therefore, the high turnover claims must be made by the court to force the departing executives to rise to the top of the mountain, and then to make a reconciliation from the premise of the law.

< /p >

"P >" is equivalent to litigation, which can be legalized through legal procedures.

No matter whether there is information disclosure before, whether there is private repurchase, illegal things can be written off. "

Zhou Xichuan said that this is Fuan's wishful thinking.

< /p >

< p > however, a lie requires another lie to support it.

The most important evidence and commitment letter in litigation is Fuan's killer.

< /p >

< p > Event originated in June 2007, fuanna issued a total of 7 million restricted stocks to more than 100 target investors in the way of private placement. The aforementioned 26 executives jointly subscribed the stock to the company.

In March 2008, fuanna applied for IPO to the SFC, in order to meet the listing requirements, fuanna terminated the < a href= "http://sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp" restricted stock incentive plan < /a >, converting all restricted stocks into unlimited ordinary shares.

< /p >

< p > it is understood that on the day of March 20, 2008, the aforementioned personnel signed two letters of confirmation and letter of commitment under the supervision of the relevant personnel of the company, but the confirmation letter was kept only in the company, and no one should keep it.

So, after many years, basically, when everyone saw the letter of commitment as evidence of litigation, he felt that there was a difference between the format and content of the document signed at that time.

< /p >

< p > the letter of commitment in the prosecution materials, the restriction clause for the departing executives is mainly from the date of signing the letter of commitment to the date when the company applies for the initial public offering of A shares and the listing date, it shall not submit a resignation to the company in writing, shall not continue to absenteeism for 7 days, do not encroachment on the assets of the company, etc., and if there is a breach of contract, the company shall pay liquidated damages to the company within 3 days of the public sale of the stock.

< /p >

< p > the former director, deputy general manager and chief financial officer of fuanna, a href= "http://sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp" > Mei Lian Qing < /a >, had participated in the discussion of the letter of commitment. Mei Lian Qing said that there were two main differences in the contents of the letter of commitment. The first is that within 3 years from the date of the listing of the company, it has become 3 years since the date of signing the agreement to the initial public offering of A shares and the listing date.

People who thought there was no problem before leaving the market were all rolled in.

Secondly, the sale price difference as compensation for loss to the company, did not limit the need to be implemented within 3 days after the lifting of the ban.

< /p >

There is a case in < p > < strong >: suspected theft of small shareholder dividends < /strong > < /p >

< p > it is reported that the more shocking secret is yet to come.

< /p >

< p > November 4th, 5 original shareholders, such as a href= "http://sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp" > Mao Shanping < /a > and Yang Haiyan, reported to Shenzhen Securities Regulatory Bureau on a series of major violation laws and regulations of fuanna. In the report, they testified that the majority shareholder of the company was suspected of controlling minority shareholders' stock and bank accounts, stealing other's shares and illegally pferring other's account assets.

< /p >

< p > it is understood that fuanna paid dividends to shareholders two times in December 8, 2010 and July 8, 2011 respectively.

But at the beginning of this year, Yang Haiyan, Mao Shanping, Yang Bo, Li Jianjun and others were surprised when they went to the bank to check the water records. Each person within two days of the bonus payment was taken away by bank pfer and ATM withdrawals.

< /p >

< p > Yang Bo said that in December 8, 2010, Fuan paid 9000 yuan cash dividend to its agricultural bank account, which was stolen 8953 yuan to a personal account named Ceng Xiaoli on the day of distribution.

In July 8, 2011, fuanna again paid him 16380 yuan of dividends, and two stolen 5000 yuan and 11360 yuan to Ceng Xiaoli's account on that day.

< /p >

The situation of < p > Mao Shanping, Yang Haiyan, Li Jianjun and Wu Tao is striking.

The 4 individuals were stolen some cash from the ATM on the day of dividend payment, and the funds stolen through pfer were unified into the < a href= "http://sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp" > Ceng Xiaoli < /a > account. The amount of money stolen by each person was consistent with the amount of dividends paid.

< /p >

< p > it is reported that the above 5 individuals are involved in the company's buyback and have handed all the cards and household information to fuanna.

< /p >