[3] Trouble comes from the mouth! Woman falsely accused of adultery after picking up a package; two individuals sentenced to one year in prison, suspended for two years

Compiled from: Supreme People's 法 [1] Information Bureau of the Academy, People's 法院 [2] News Media General Agency
 
Case review
[3] On April 30, 2021, the People's Court of Yuhang District, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province, publicly tried the defamation case of defendants Lang Moumou and He Moumou in accordance with the law. The People's Procuratorate of Yuhang District, Hangzhou City 法院 [4] sent personnel to appear in court to support the prosecution, and Lang Moumou, He Moumou, and their defenders attended the proceedings.

 
 

[5] The court found through trial: At around 18:00 on July 7, 2020, defendant Lang Moumou, at a courier station in Liangzhu Street, Yuhang District, Hangzhou City, used a mobile phone to secretly film the victim Gu Moumou, who was waiting to pick up a package, and posted the video in a WeChat group. Defendant He Moumou used a WeChat account to impersonate Gu Moumou and chat with himself, then conspired with Lang Moumou to use their respective WeChat accounts to impersonate Gu Moumou and a courier, fabricating WeChat chat records in which Gu Moumou met the courier and had multiple improper sexual relations. To enhance the credibility of the chat records, Lang Moumou and He Moumou also fabricated videos and images such as "on the way to the date" and "at the date scene." Between July 7 and 16 of the same month, Lang Moumou posted dozens of screenshots of the fabricated WeChat chat records, along with videos and images, in the WeChat group, triggering a large number of vulgar and obscene comments within the group.
 
Afterwards, the aforementioned secretly filmed video and fabricated WeChat chat screenshots were merged and forwarded by others, spreading to over 110 WeChat groups (with a total of more than 20,000 members), triggering a large number of vulgar comments. Multiple WeChat public accounts and websites reposted compilations of these chat records (with a total of over 20,000 reads), affecting Gu Moumou's normal work and life. After Gu Moumou reported the case to the public security authorities, Lang Moumou and He Moumou voluntarily went to the authorities to accept investigation and admitted to the aforementioned facts. The public security authorities imposed administrative detention on Lang Moumou and He Moumou and issued a police bulletin to refute the rumors.
 
From August 2020 to December of the same year, this incident was reported by multiple media outlets and sparked heated online discussions. Among them, the Weibo topic #The woman falsely accused of cheating still cannot find a job# alone garnered 470 million reads and 58,000 discussions. The widespread dissemination of this incident on the internet caused a sense of insecurity among the general public and severely disrupted the public order of cyberspace.
 
After the incident, the defendants Lang Moumou and He Moumou compensated the victim Gu Moumou.
 
 
[1] Court Opinion
The court found after trial that the defendants Lang Moumou and He Moumou, seeking excitement and attention, fabricated facts harming others' reputations and disseminated them on the information network, causing the information to be widely read and forwarded. This severely infringed on the victim Gu Moumou's personality rights, affected her normal work and life, caused her certain economic losses, and led to a certain degree of social evaluation damage. This constitutes fabricating facts to defame others through the information network, and the circumstances are serious. The actions of both defendants constitute the crime of defamation, and the charges brought by the public prosecution are valid.
 
Given that the criminal actions of the two defendants have not only affected the victim Gu Moumou but also, due to the randomness of their target selection, caused panic among the general public and a decline in social security and order; the defamatory information spread widely on the internet, triggering a large number of obscene and vulgar comments. Despite the police's refutation, it still caused significant disruption to the public order of the internet and seriously endangered social order. The public prosecution's indictment of the two defendants for defamation is in accordance with the law.
 
Considering that the two defendants have statutory mitigating circumstances such as voluntary surrender and admission of guilt and acceptance of punishment, voluntarily compensated for losses, sincerely repented, actively repaired legal relationships, and are first-time offenders with no prior criminal record, and that the application of probation would not have a significant adverse impact on the community where they reside, the court accepted the public prosecution's recommendation to sentence the two defendants to one year in prison, suspended for two years, and the defense counsel's opinion on applying probation.
 
The court pronounced the verdict in court, sentencing the defendants Lang Moumou and He Moumou to one year in prison, suspended for two years, for the crime of defamation.

 

 
[1] The author's perspective
The reason this case became a criminal case is that the two defendants had a very negative impact on the online environment, not only disrupting public order but also causing a sense of insecurity among the general public. Additionally, it greatly affected the life of the victim Gu Moumou, leading to job loss and depression. However, fortunately, the two defendants had statutory mitigating circumstances such as voluntary surrender and admission of guilt and acceptance of punishment, and they proactively compensated Gu Moumou at the earliest opportunity. This shows that the two defendants are genuinely remorseful and actively making amends. Although many netizens believe that a one-year suspended sentence is too lenient, they overlook the significance behind it. On one hand, a suspended sentence is still a form of punishment, carrying a deterrent effect and highlighting the warning function of criminal law. On the other hand, the two defendants are first-time offenders who actively provided civil compensation, demonstrating their attitude of admitting guilt and repenting.
 
The educational significance of this case is not only reflected in the two defendants but also in the protection of citizens' legitimate rights and interests under a rule-of-law society. Whether in the real world or the virtual internet, citizens' legitimate rights and interests are sacred and inviolable. The verdict in this case can serve as a warning for future social behavior, punishing the defendants' wrongful actions while also giving others a chance to reform, thereby achieving the dual purpose of punishment and education.