Recently, the Lotus Leaf Court of the Shuangfeng Court concluded the case of the plaintiff Peng Moumou v. the defendant Wang Moumou private loan dispute, in this case, the IOU kept by the plaintiff Peng Moumou was cut off by the waist, only the upper half is left, what is the mystery?Does the people's court support its claim?Take a look at the case studies in this issue.
Case review
In October 2023, the plaintiff Peng Moumou filed a lawsuit with the Shuangfeng Court, requesting the court to order the defendant Wang Moumou to immediately repay the principal of the loan of 500,000 yuan and interest and bear the litigation costs of the case. However, only the first half of the key evidence of the IOU submitted by the plaintiff Peng Moumou to the court remains: "The IOU is now borrowed to Peng Moumou for 500,000 yuan00 yuan). Borrower: Wang, 20148.7”。And the plaintiff Peng Moumou admitted that the lower part of the IOU was missing due to his own carelessness and other reasons. Defendant Wang Moumou asserted that the lower part of the IOU indicated his ID number and agreed that the repayment period was February 2015, and Wang Moumou claimed that he had fully repaid the loan in 2015.
Court trial
The Shuangfeng Court held that Article 67 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that the parties have the responsibility to provide evidence for their own claims. Article 48 of the Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings stipulates that if the party in control of the documentary evidence refuses to submit the documentary evidence without justifiable reasons, the people's court may determine that the content of the documentary evidence asserted by the other party is true. In this case, the IOU was controlled by the plaintiff Peng, and now the plaintiff Peng is unable to provide the complete IOU under his control, and this court accepts the claim of the defendant Wang.
The first paragraph of Article 188 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China stipulates that the statute of limitations for filing a request to the people's court for the protection of civil rights is three years, and where the law provides otherwise, follow those provisions. Combined with the trial investigation, the original and the defendant in this case were both in cash, such a large amount of cash did not conform to the transaction Xi, and the loan time stated in the IOU was August 2014, the defendant Wang claimed that the repayment period agreed by the two parties was February 2015, and the plaintiff Peng could not provide relevant evidence to collect the loan from the defendant Wang, and his claim had exceeded the statutory statute of limitations, and this court did not support it.
The judgment then rejected the plaintiff Peng's claim that the defendant Wang Moumou should repay the principal and interest of the loan. The above-mentioned judgment has not been appealed by either the plaintiff or the defendant, and it has now taken effect.
What the judge said
An IOU is a written document indicating the creditor-debtor relationship, which is generally written and signed by the debtor, indicating that the debtor has owed the creditor the amount indicated in the IOU. The integrity of the IOU is very important, because the court does not know whether the torn part has other expressions of intent, and in civil litigation, in line with the principle that whoever asserts the claim bears the burden of proof, if the evidence cannot be presented, it will bear the result of losing the case.
*: Twin Peaks Court.