An incident occurred in Datong City, Shanxi Province, the China Legal Research Center, which was called the "Engagement Case". The case involved a couple of prospective couples, who had an argument 4 days after their engagement, and the woman accused the man ** and reported the case to **. After months of investigation and investigation, the case was pronounced in the first instance at the Yanggao County Court on December 25. After the verdict was announced, the defendant and the husband appealed in court and did not accept the verdict.
On the day of the engagement, the man's 27-year-old man and the woman's 24-year-old woman held an engagement banquet in the presence of an intermediary. According to the engagement agreement, the man gave the girl a bride price of 100,000 yuan and a gold ring. The two parties pressed their fingerprints on the agreement and promised to register the woman's name on the real estate certificate of the marriage house with an area of more than 90 square meters after one year of marriage. On the second day after the engagement, the woman held a homecoming banquet.
On the fourth day after the engagement, the woman asked the man to immediately add her name to the title deed of the house and asked for another 100,000 yuan in dowry. However, the husband did not have the money at the time and was unable to go through the title deeds immediately. The woman was dissatisfied and accused the man of refusing to comply with her demands. In the afternoon of the same day, the woman reported to ** that she had been attacked by the man**.
During the trial of the case, the court mainly relied on the woman's confession to determine the defendant's reasons for conviction. The woman emphasized her opposition to premarital sex, and said that the man admitted ** her fact during the engagement process. However, the defendant and his family denied it and stated that their sexual activity was based on the fact that they were engaged. After more than 40 minutes, the court finally sentenced the defendant to three years in prison.
The defendant and his family were dissatisfied with the first-instance verdict and appealed in court. However, since the husband's defence lawyer was unable to appear on that day, further hearings and decisions are pending on whether the appeal is successful and the subsequent legal proceedings are to be made. Yin Qingli, a well-known lawyer, said that he participated in the defense of the defendant after the case and submitted relevant defense opinions on November 28. However, the above opinion was not adopted by the court.
In the 203 days from the time of the case to December 25, the defendant's mother, Ms. Zhen, saw her son in court for the first time. Ms. Zhen was very worried about her son's condition, saying that he had become thin and pale, and that he did not look bloody. Ms. Zhen insisted that her son's relationship with the woman was based on the fact that the parties were engaged, and that her son did not have a ** woman.
The first-instance verdict of this "engagement case" has aroused widespread public attention and heated discussions. The case involves not only the protection of individual rights and interests, but also the governance of social customs such as marriage, premarital interactions, and bride price. As an observer, I believe that this case is not only a criminal case, but also a scrutiny of the marriage system and related laws and regulations. Issues such as premarital sex, the impact of the bride price system on marital relationships, etc., all require us to reflect and think.
Marriage is an important life choice that should be based on mutual respect and sincere communication. At the same time, the supervision of the marriage and family system in society also needs to be improved. In this case, the parties had a dispute over interests such as money and fame, which eventually led to legal disputes and significant consequences. Therefore, the views on the bride price system and premarital relationships need to be clearer, and the relevant issues need to be regulated through legal means.
In addition, we need to be vigilant against the abuse and over-amplification of individual cases. When dealing with such cases, we should try to be objective, conduct trials in accordance with the law and reason, and prevent ** and emotions from interfering with the case. Only through a fair and fair trial can we protect the legitimate rights and interests of the masses of the people and maintain normal social order.
In short, the first-instance verdict of this "engagement case" has attracted widespread attention. We should think deeply and reflect on the impact of personal harm and social relationships. It is hoped that through the trial of this case and the maintenance of justice, we can provide useful lessons for the construction of our society and the rule of law. At the same time, it also calls on the public to understand and respect the marriage relationship, as well as to comply with and implement relevant laws and regulations. Only in this way can we build a just, equitable and harmonious social environment.