[2] Compiled from: Red Star News, The Paper
 
[3] Case Review
[4] On October 20, 2019, a 13-year-old boy surnamed Cai from Dalian, Liaoning, murdered a 10-year-old girl surnamed Wang from the same residential area and discarded her body in a bush. As Cai had not reached the legal age for criminal responsibility, the police lawfully declined to pursue criminal charges and instead placed him in a three-year correctional facility. Subsequently, the victim's family filed a civil lawsuit against Cai and his parents.

 
 

[5] On August 10, 2020, the Dalian Shahekou District People's Court issued a civil judgment in the case, with Cai's parents and lawyer again absent from court. The first-instance verdict stated that the defendants, Cai Mouwei (Cai's father) and Zhuang Moujie (Cai's mother), as Cai's legal guardians, failed to adequately monitor his personality development and behavior, neglected guidance and education, leading to his disregard for the law and life. According to relevant provisions of the Supreme People's Court's Interpretation on Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Trials of Personal Injury Compensation Cases and the Interpretation on Issues Concerning the Determination of Compensation for Mental Damages in Civil Torts, Cai's tortious act resulted in the severe consequence of Wang's death. Moreover, this case differs in nature from ordinary civil torts causing death, as Cai committed intentional homicide through cruel means. Cai Mouwei and Zhuang Moujie shall bear compensation liability to the plaintiff.
 
The court's judgment includes:
1. Defendants Cai Mouwei and Zhuang Moujie shall publicly apologize to plaintiffs Wang Mouzhang (father of victim Wang) and He Mouzhen (mother of victim Wang) in a Liaoning provincial-level print media within ten days from the effective date of this judgment (the content of the apology must be reviewed by the court);
2. Defendants Cai Mouwei and Zhuang Moujie shall compensate plaintiffs Wang Mouzhang and He Mouzhen for funeral expenses of 46,134 yuan, death compensation of 816,500 yuan, transportation costs for funeral arrangements of 1,000 yuan, lost work income of 22,390 yuan, and mental distress damages of 400,000 yuan, totaling 1,286,024 yuan, within ten days from the effective date of this judgment.
 
However, two months have passed since the civil compensation part of the judgment took effect, and Cai Moumou's parents have not voluntarily fulfilled it. Wang's parents have received neither a single cent from the Cai family nor a sincere apology from them. After Wang's parents applied for court enforcement, Cai Moumou's parents still refused to cooperate with the court's enforcement. Currently, Cai Moumou's parents have been subjected to judicial detention measures by the Shahekou District People's Court for a period of 15 days.

 

 
What is judicial detention?
1. Article 111 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China
Any litigation participant or other person who commits any of the following acts may be fined or detained by the people's court depending on the severity of the circumstances; if the act constitutes a crime, criminal liability shall be pursued in accordance with the law:  
(1) Forging or destroying important evidence, thereby obstructing the people's court from hearing a case;
(2) Using violence, threats, or bribery to prevent a witness from testifying, or instructing, bribing, or coercing another person to give false testimony;
(3) Concealing, transferring, selling, damaging, or destroying property that has been sealed up or seized, or property that has been inventoried and placed under the custody of a person, or transferring property that has been frozen;
(4) Insulting, slandering, falsely accusing, assaulting, or retaliating against judicial personnel, litigation participants, witnesses, interpreters, expert evaluators, inspectors, or persons assisting in enforcement;
(5) Using violence, threats, or other methods to obstruct judicial personnel from performing their duties.
(6) Refusing to execute a legally effective judgment or ruling of the People's Court.    
 
2. Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, Article 188
The acts of refusing to execute a legally effective judgment or ruling of the People's Court as specified in Article 111, Paragraph 1, Item 6 of the Civil Procedure Law include:  
(1) Concealing, transferring, selling off, or destroying property, or gratuitously transferring property, trading property at a clearly unreasonable price, waiving due debts, or gratuitously providing guarantees for others after the legal document becomes effective, thereby rendering the People's Court unable to enforce the judgment;  
(2) Concealing, transferring, or destroying property that has been provided as a guarantee to the People's Court, or disposing of such property without the People's Court's permission;
(3) Engaging in consumption in violation of the People's Court's order restricting high consumption.
(4) Those who have the ability to perform but refuse to fulfill the obligations specified in an effective legal document in accordance with a people's court's enforcement notice;
(5) Individuals obligated to assist in enforcement who, after receiving a notice of assistance in enforcement from a people's court, refuse to provide such assistance.  
 
 
[1] The author's perspective
In this case, Cai Moumou committed such heinous acts, and as his guardians, Cai Moumou's parents bear responsibility, which is also the basis for the court's judgment ordering them to bear civil compensation liability. However, during the civil litigation process, from the court session to the judgment, Cai Moumou's parents never appeared in court, and after the judgment took effect, they still refused to comply.
 
The law will not tolerate such behavior from Cai Moumou's parents. On September 7 this year, Wang Moumou's parents applied to the court for compulsory enforcement. According to the law, refusing to comply with a legally effective judgment or ruling of a people's court constitutes an act obstructing justice and is subject to penalties such as fines or detention. Cai Moumou's parents were detained for 15 days, which they brought upon themselves. If further investigation reveals acts such as concealing or transferring property, they may even face criminal prosecution for refusing to execute a court judgment or ruling.
 
At the same time, the law grants courts various means of compulsory enforcement, with auctioning property being just one of them. Unless the person subject to enforcement truly has no property to execute, the 128 yuan compensation and solatium must be enforced. Now that Cai Moumou's parents have been judicially detained and their house faces auction, this confirms that unavoidable responsibilities cannot be evaded.
 
As for the other judgment content, "publicly apologize in Liaoning provincial print media," if Cai Moumou's parents still choose to refuse compliance, the usual alternative in judicial practice is to publish the key points of the judgment in the media, with the costs borne by the person subject to enforcement. However, the author believes this approach fails to achieve the goal of comforting the victim. Instead, it might be more advisable for Wang Moumou's parents to issue a condemnation statement in the media regarding Cai Moumou's parents' refusal to apologize, with the costs borne by Cai Moumou's parents.
 
[1] The court's verdict is a manifestation of justice from the state, the law, and even moral principles, and also a measure of compensation for the victim and her family. The victimized girl has been gone for nearly a year. The author hopes that the verdict can be executed as soon as possible to heal the pain of the living and comfort the soul of the deceased.