[Guiding Lawyer: Wang Tengfeng, Handling Lawyer: Cao Guanghui]

In March 2010, Shenzhen Shenyue Optoelectronics Co., Ltd. began supplying touch screens to Haoen Electronics Technology Co., Ltd. However, from October 2013 to the end of 2013, Haoen Electronics owed a total of 1.75 million RMB in payments. After several negotiations, Haoen Electronics consistently refused to repay the debt. With no other option, Shenyue Optoelectronics entrusted Wang Tengfeng, director of Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm, and his assistant Cao Guanghui to handle the case.

Although Haoen Electronics raised various defenses, such as the plaintiff's failure to issue VAT invoices, substandard product quality, and delayed delivery, attempting to confuse the issue, Lawyer Wang Tengfeng argued that the defendant had not provided evidence that issuing invoices was a prerequisite for payment, and that the rights and obligations of both parties should be determined based on the original intent of the contract. Furthermore, the defendant failed to prove that the plaintiff had breached the contract by failing to issue VAT invoices, delivering substandard goods, or delaying delivery, so the defendant's defenses were not accepted. At the same time, Lawyer Wang actively guided the judge's thinking, directing the key point of the case to the contract agreement between the parties, simplifying the complex facts into the principle of "debt must be repaid." Ultimately, the court was not misled by Haoen Electronics' defenses and ruled that the defendant, Haoen Electronics, must pay the plaintiff, Shenyue Optoelectronics, 1.766 million RMB in principal and 830,000 RMB in overdue interest.

This case is a typical example of a payment dispute in a contract sale, a common type of litigation in legal practice. However, in such lawsuits, lawyers must not only present the facts and arguments on behalf of their clients but also actively guide the judge's logical thinking during courtroom debates, helping the judge understand their perspective, identify the opponent's weaknesses, and ultimately secure the judge's agreement or approval of their arguments. This ability to guide the judge's logical thinking is an indispensable litigation skill in many sales contract disputes and even numerous civil and commercial cases, making it highly valuable for young lawyers to study and learn.