Illegal Reimbursement For Entertainment Is Therefore Legal.

Sun Liang is a business director of a trading company. After entering the office for 6 years, the unit has signed an unfixed term labor contract with him.

According to the post regulations, the cost of entertainment and travel expenses below 2000 yuan can be directly reimbursed by Sun Liang directly from the receipt and the original receipt containing the details of the expenses.

However, the notes with a sum of 2000 yuan or above must be reported to the manager of the company before the manager can sign the approval before he can reimburse the fee.

The system has been implemented for more than 10 years, and it is learned once again every year when employees are trained, and then signed to confirm the company's known rules.

In September last year, the company found that when Sun Liang was reimbursed, he repeatedly split a fee item into several invoices, reduced the amount of reimbursement, repeatedly used illegal personal invoices, and did not provide invoices or small bills in order to evade the financial approval system.

For this reason, the facts identified by the unit are sent to Sun Liang by e-mail.

After the examination and approval of the labor union of the reporting unit, the company issued a notice of rescission of the labor contract to Sun Liang to dismiss him.

Sun Liang refused to accept the application.

It is rejected that litigation is required to restore labor relations.

Sun Liang believed that the invoices he had reimbursed were used for the normal business of the company. The unit said the problem was just a flaw in his form of reimbursement, which did not constitute a serious violation of discipline, so the unit was released in advance.

It is illegal.

The unit believes that Sun Liang's behavior is a serious violation of the company's rules and regulations, and it is lawful to dismiss him.

From this point of view, the focus of the labor dispute lies in whether the trade company and Sun Liang are relieved of their legal relationship.

According to the Supreme People's court's hearing

The provisions of the thirteenth article of the interpretation of several issues concerning the application of the law, the employer's burden of proof is due to the labor dispute arising from the decision of the employer to expel, remove, dismiss, rescind the labor contract, reduce labor remuneration, and calculate the working life of the worker.

Therefore, the burden of proof is borne by the trading company.

When the case was heard, the trade company provided the labor contract signed by both parties, signed the confirmation of the company's rules and regulations and the system of reimbursement for expenses known by Sun Liang, and submitted the list of financial reimbursement fees and invoices to Sun Liang, and submitted the notice of labor contract and the Union's letter, in order to prove that the dissolution of labor relations with Sun Liang was based on facts, facts and procedures.

Sun Liang endorsed the authenticity of the evidence, but denied the force of proof, but did not provide refutable evidence, so the court's objection to Sun Liang was not accepted.

At the same time, the court found that in the process of reimbursement, the court found that there was a fact that a reimbursement item was split into several invoices and deliberately suppressed the amount of reimbursement so that the invoice value was inconsistent with the amount of reimbursement made by Sun Liang.

The unit believed that the act had reached a serious degree of violation of discipline and sufficient evidence. Therefore, Sun Liang's request for resumption of labor relations was eventually rejected.

In the Internet era, cash pactions are becoming less and less. Apart from trading with natural persons, there is a large number of cash pactions between enterprises and enterprises.

If there is any accounting fraud or income loss,

For more information, please pay attention to the world clothing shoes and hats and Internet cafes.