After the man picked up the female college student s mobile phone, he asked for 2,000 yuan and flash

Mondo Digital Updated on 2024-01-19

A female college student in Hefei, Anhui Province, was eating at a restaurant when her mobile phone was left at the pick-up area and later taken away by a man. The man said that in order to get the phone back, the girl had to pay him 2,000 yuan. On December 2, the girl told the Jimu News reporter that there was not only important information in the mobile phone, but also the ** of her deceased family, and he threatened me that if I didn't give money, I would flash the phone. The staff of the local police station said that the police did not have the right to force the man to return the mobile phone, and suggested that the owner go to the court to sue.

The lawyer believes that the man not only has the obligation to return the mobile phone, but also has the obligation to take proper care of the mobile phone before returning it, and if the mobile phone is damaged or lost due to intentional or gross negligence, he should bear the corresponding legal responsibility. It is recommended that the man return the mobile phone to the woman as soon as possible to avoid unnecessary legal liability.

The man picked up the female college student's mobile phone and asked her for 1,000 yuan.

On the evening of November 19, Zhang and his party of three went to a cafeteria in Hefei, Anhui Province for dinner, during which Zhang found that his mobile phone was missing. Several people searched for a long time without success, so they chose to call the police for help. After the police arrived at the scene, they called up the restaurant surveillance. ** It shows that Zhang left his mobile phone at the food pick-up place, and later, the mobile phone was picked up by a man about 30 years old who wore glasses.

* Screenshots. At that time, I was very happy, thinking that the phone would be retrieved immediately. On November 22, with the help of **, Zhang got in touch with Geng, the man in the surveillance. But what Zhang didn't expect was that the other party proposed two plans that were unacceptable to her: first, Zhang paid 2,000 yuan, and Geng returned the phone;Second, Geng paid Zhang 2,000 yuan to "buy" the mobile phone.

Zhang introduced that her mobile phone is an Apple 13, which took less than 1 year, and it cost more than 6,000 yuan when she bought it, and there are a lot of important information stored in the mobile phone, as well as the ** of the deceased family.

I was still a student and didn't have that much money. Zhang repeatedly begged the man to return the phone, but the man insisted on asking for 2,000 yuan, and even threatened to flash the phone if he didn't give money.

Under the stalemate, the man finally relented and promised to reduce 500 yuan on the basis of 2,000 yuan. "He asked me to pay 1,000 yuan and another 500 yuan, and he asked the restaurant for it. Zhang said that in order to keep the information in the mobile phone and get the mobile phone back, she agreed to Geng's request.

On December 1, Zhang took out 500 yuan from more than 1,000 yuan of living expenses and transferred it to Geng, who promised to mail his mobile phone to the fertilizer. "He sent me the courier number, and asked me to transfer him another 500 yuan, I said to transfer the remaining 500 yuan after delivery, but he canceled the courier, I contacted him again, and he only replied with one word 'roll'. Zhang said that later, Geng returned the 500 yuan he had received to her.

Screenshot of the chat (courtesy of the interviewee).

Lawyer: It is recommended to return the phone as soon as possible to avoid unnecessary legal liability.

On the afternoon of December 2, the restaurant staff told the Jimu News reporter that Geng had indeed contacted the restaurant before and asked for a few hundred yuan in benefits, but because the boss was not there, the staff did not agree to his request.

The reporter contacted Geng, who said that there is no flashing yet. How are you going to resolve this matter?Geng did not respond.

Subsequently, the reporter contacted the police station in the jurisdiction where Zhang called the police, and the operator said that ** had no right to force Geng to return the mobile phone, and suggested that Zhang go through the judicial process and sue Geng in court.

Dong Wenming, a lawyer at Hubei Zhenghe Law Firm, said that Article 314 of the Civil Code clearly stipulates that if a lost property is found, it should be returned to the right holder. The finder shall promptly notify the right holder to collect it, or send it to the public security and other relevant departments. At the same time, article 316 of the Civil Code also stipulates that before the finder delivers the lost property to the relevant department, the relevant department shall properly take care of the lost property before the lost property is collected. Where the damage or loss of lost property is caused intentionally or through gross negligence, civil liability shall be borne. Specifically, in this case, Geng not only has the obligation to return the mobile phone, but also has the obligation to properly keep the mobile phone before returning it, and if the mobile phone is damaged or lost due to intentional or gross negligence, he should bear the corresponding legal responsibility, "It is recommended that he return the mobile phone to Zhang as soon as possible to avoid unnecessary legal liability."

Fu Jian, director of Henan Zejin Law Firm, pointed out that the owner of the mobile phone is Zhang, although the mobile phone is currently kept by Geng, but it is not Geng's property, if Geng refuses to return it, it is an embezzlement of other people's property, Zhang can sue the people's court in accordance with the law, and civil sue Geng to return the mobile phone.

The man offered to buy the phone, and this request was not reasonable. Because the phone was originally the personal property of the female student, the man could not forcibly ask for it. Fu Jian said that the man threatened to flash the phone, and if he really did this, then the act was suspected of destroying other people's property, and it could also be suspected of violating other people's personal privacy and information rights. (Jimu News).

Related Pages