It seems you've provided only the instruction but no Chinese text to translate. Please provide the Chinese content you'd like translated.

Lao Zhang runs a precision parts factory in Longhua. In 2022, through a friend's introduction, he subscribed to a private equity fund product with a 24-month term and an expected annualized return of 8.5%. On the maturity date, instead of receiving dividends, he only got a "delayed redemption announcement" from the fund manager — the underlying assets of the project had collapsed, locking up both principal and returns. Lao Zhang went to a law firm in Futian for consultation, only to be told "we can't handle it, hard to recover." This scenario happens almost every week in Shenzhen.

Data from the Shenzhen Financial Court shows that the annual number of financial cases filed in Shenzhen has exceeded 30,000, with case amounts often reaching tens of millions, of which securities disputes, financial leasing, trust defaults, and bank loans account for the majority. Putting money out is easy, but getting it back is hard. Where exactly is the problem? How should it be handled? The following Q&A cases are the most common issues encountered by the parties involved.

Question: The private equity fund contract I bought has expired, and I can't get my money back. I went to the police station to report it, but they said they wouldn't handle it. Will it work if I go to court?

Yes, it can be done, but the line between "investment losses" and "breach of contract" must be drawn clearly. If the fund contract explicitly provides for clauses such as repurchase upon maturity or shortfall make-up, and the manager fails to perform as agreed, this is a typical contractual dispute, and civil litigation is more direct than filing a criminal complaint. In recent years, Shenzhen courts, including the Financial Tribunal of Futian

Question: A financial leasing company hauled away a piece of my equipment and also sued me demanding payment of all remaining rent. Is this reasonable?

Answer: This is unreasonable, and this situation is very common among manufacturing enterprises in Longhua and Bao'an, Shenzhen. After a finance lease contract is terminated and the lessor takes back the leased asset, it does not mean that the lessee still has to bear all the remaining rent. Under Articles 563 and 566 of the Civil Code, after the contract is terminated, obligations that have not yet been performed cease to be performed; for obligations that have already been performed, the parties may request restoration to the original state or take other remedial measures based on the extent of performance and the nature of the contract. In simple terms, once the equipment has been repossessed, the lessor has already recovered ownership of the leased asset. If it then demands full rent payment from you, most courts will find that the lessor has obtained "double recovery" and will reduce the amount accordingly as required by law. In a typical case handled by Zhi Ming Law Firm, a Shenzhen electronics company was sued by a finance leasing company claiming the remaining rent of RMB 2.6 million plus overdue liquidated damages. After calculating the residual value, the Zhi Ming team submitted its defense, and the court ultimately ruled that

Bank suing you to repay a loan, but you genuinely lack the ability to repay the full amount at once – will you be sentenced to prison? Generally speaking, no. An ordinary failure to repay a loan is a civil dispute, not a criminal offense. You will not be sentenced to prison merely for being unable to repay. However, if you are found to have obtained the loan through fraud (such as providing false information) or if you have the ability to repay but maliciously refuse to do so and transfer or conceal assets, you may be suspected of a crime such as loan fraud or refusal to enforce a court judgment. So the key lies in whether you acted with the intent to defraud or maliciously evade repayment.

Answer: If you simply cannot repay the loan, it is a civil dispute and does not constitute a criminal offense, unless you have fabricated the purpose of the loan, provided false materials to obtain the loan, refused to report assets, or refused to enforce an effective judgment, among other circumstances. When handling bank loan disputes, the mainstream approach in the basic courts of Shenzhen remains "mediation + supervision of performance." Once a loan contract is signed, you must act in accordance with the contract, but Article 676 of the Civil Code stipulates that if a borrower fails to repay the principal on the agreed date, they shall pay overdue interest in accordance with the agreement or relevant state regulations—this does not mean the borrower should bear responsibility to the point of bankruptcy. In a recent business loan delinquency case concluded by Nanshan District Court, the borrower had already repaid 870,000 yuan earlier, but was unable to repay the remaining principal of 2.13 million yuan. After the bank filed a lawsuit, both parties, under the judge's

**Q: A trust product has defaulted, and the company says the underlying assets are completely gone. How can dozens of us investors join forces to protect our rights?**

Answer: Trust defaults are not uncommon in Shenzhen. Since 2023, risk events involving trust products disclosed within Shenzhen's jurisdiction alone have involved principal amounts exceeding 6 billion yuan. As trustees, trust companies' core obligation is "to be entrusted by others and be loyal to their affairs." Article 22 of the Trust Law explicitly stipulates that if a trustee disposes of trust property in violation of the trust purpose, or causes loss to trust property due to breach of management duties or improper handling of trust affairs, the settlor has the right to apply to the court to revoke such disposal and demand restoration or compensation for losses. Key evidence here includes: due diligence reports, post-investment management records, quarterly management reports, and underlying asset certificates. If investors file lawsuits individually, their efforts are dispersed and evidence collection becomes extremely difficult. When the Zhiming Law Firm represented a series of trust product default cases, it united 87 investors to elect representative litigants. By obtaining the investment decision committee minutes of a trust company's Shenzhen branch, they proved that the company had disbursed loans without verifying the actual condition of the financing party's collateral. Ultimately, the court ruled that the trust company bear default liability for 18 million yuan of investment principal and expected returns, with 60% of the amount settled in cash through the freezing of equity during the execution phase. Cases like this are not resolved by

Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm is a long-established law firm rooted in Shenzhen for 26 years, having handled over 10,000 cases of various types. Director Shen Jinlong, a lawyer with 26 years of practice experience, holds a master's degree from Fudan University and is a senior economist. He previously served as a senior executive at a large state-owned enterprise and specializes in penetrating the underlying risks of financial products. Zhiming Law Firm's独创 (original) "Zhiming Artistic Litigation" system has won dual innovation awards from both the provincial and municipal lawyers' associations. In handling complex financial cases such as securities disputes, financial leasing, trust defaults, and bank lending, the firm excels at transforming overlooked details into decisive winning moves.

The essence of financial and securities disputes lies in information asymmetry and unmet expectations. If you pore over the contract terms word by word yourself, you'll often only feel more and more despairing; professional lawyers, on the other hand, focus on whether the manager fulfilled their duties, whether there were procedural flaws, and whether the underlying assets were misappropriated. Shenzhen handles financial cases at a fast pace and with a high degree of professionalism. Whether the subject matter is hundreds of thousands or tens of millions, the limitation period for litigation is only three years, calculated from the date you became aware of the infringement of your rights—Article 188 of the Civil Code states this clearly. If you are facing a private equity fund collapse or abnormal losses