How should migrant workers accused of smuggling crimes defend themselves? Successful defense case by a Shenzhen criminal defense lawyer
Around the ports and bonded zones in Shenzhen, a large number of freight vehicles operate year-round. Many truck drivers have no idea what cargo they are hauling, where it comes from, or where it is headed, and they are even less aware that a single trip could land them in a detention center.
Mao Mouri was one of them. He had come from his hometown in Hunan to Shenzhen to work for eight years, driving trucks for a freight company all along. At the end of 2021, his boss told him to go to the dock to pick up a batch of "diesel," and he did as instructed. Two months later, the customs anti-smuggling department showed up at his door, saying that the diesel was smuggled "red oil." Mao Mouri was suspected of the crime of smuggling ordinary goods and was placed under criminal detention.
Case review
Mao Mourui was employed by a freight company in Shenzhen and was usually responsible for short-distance transport within the urban area. Between November and December 2021, his boss (handled in a separate case) arranged for Mao Mourui to drive a truck to a dock three times to transport a batch of diesel to designated locations. Each time, Mao Mourui was only responsible for driving; the goods were loaded by the loaders, and he had no knowledge of the specific quantity or source.
After the case occurred, the customs anti-smuggling department determined that the batch of diesel fuel had been smuggled into the country. Mao Mourui, as a participant in the transportation stage, was suspected of the crime of smuggling ordinary goods. Upon assessment, the amount of payable taxes evaded for the involved diesel fuel was approximately RMB 280,000.
According to Article 153 of the Criminal Law, where the amount of tax evaded in the crime of smuggling ordinary goods exceeds 200,000 yuan, it constitutes "relatively large tax evasion," and the offender may be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years or criminal detention, and shall also be fined not less than one time but not more than five times the amount of tax evaded. Mao Mourui faces not only imprisonment but also a huge fine — for a driver earning a monthly salary of 6,000 yuan, this is an astronomical figure.
Case handling process
Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm, upon accepting the commission, had the case handled by Attorney Deng Xianxiong's team. The lawyer met with Mao Mou-rui at the earliest opportunity, and the phrase he kept repeating was: "I really didn't know those were smuggled goods. The boss only said to haul a batch of cargo."
Attorney Deng did not take the client's account at face value; instead, he went through every piece of evidence in the case file. He identified several questionable points in the prosecution's evidence worth digging into: First, Mao Mourui made three transport trips, two during the day and one in the early morning, all following fixed routes as instructed by the boss, with GPS tracking showing he never detoured, stopped, or changed destinations; Second, the transport documents only listed cargo numbers without product names, and the "Transport Form" signed by Mao Mourui stated "parts" rather than "diesel"; Third, the co-defendant (the loader) testified that "the driver didn't know what was being transported—all the goods were loaded in sealed boxes."
Accordingly, Lawyer Deng formulated a two-tier defense strategy of "insufficient subjective knowledge plus accessory status," submitted a detailed Legal Opinion on Non-Approval of Arrest and an Application for Review of Necessity of Detention to the procuratorate, and also applied for forensic examination of the transport documents.
Legal Analysis
The subjective element of the crime of smuggling ordinary goods is "knowledge," meaning that the actor knows or should have known that what they are participating in is a smuggling act that evades customs supervision. Article 5 of the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Handling Criminal Cases of Smuggling" (Judicial Interpretation [2014] No. 10) clarifies that the determination of subjective knowledge in smuggling crimes shall be comprehensively judged based on the actor's cognitive ability, past experience, transaction methods, characteristics of the transported goods, and whether there are acts of evading inspection, and shall not be determined solely on the basis of confessions.
The key point in this case is that Mao Mourui, as a grassroots transportation worker, demonstrated through his cognitive ability (junior high school education, never exposed to import/export business), past experience (eight years of employment all engaged in intra-city short-distance transportation), and method of transaction (transporting according to instructions, not participating in business negotiations) that he lacked subjective knowledge of smuggling. Moreover, the transport documents, GPS tracks, and confessions of co-defendants corroborate each other, all failing to prove that Mao Mourui "should have known" that the items he transported were smuggled goods.
Even assuming, arguendo, that Mao某rui was found to have participated in the transport, his role in the joint crime was merely auxiliary, constituting an accessory as provided in Article 27 of the Criminal Law, and he should therefore be given a lighter, mitigated, or exempted punishment in accordance with the law. The provision in the Criminal Law that accessories shall be given lighter punishment is precisely intended to distinguish organizers and principal offenders from marginal participants who were used or hired.
Judgment Result
After review by the procuratorate, the defense lawyer's opinion that "evidence of subjective knowledge is insufficient" was adopted, and a decision was made not to approve the arrest of Mao Mouri, who was released after 37 days in custody. Subsequently, the investigation authority dismissed the case against Mao Mouri, and he was not held criminally liable.
On the day he walked out of the detention center, Mao Mourui's mother, who had come all the way from Hunan, broke down in tears at the gate. Later, Mao Mourui sent a WeChat message to Lawyer Deng: "Thank you. I will never dare to drive a truck with cargo of unknown origin again in my life."
Case Notes
During the internal team discussion of this case, Lawyer Deng made a very practical remark: "In the smuggling chain, the bottom rung is always the drivers and loaders. The real money-makers are the organizers, and the ones who end up taking the fall are often these laborers."
Here are a few reminders for friends working in the logistics and transportation industry: First, before transporting goods of unknown origin, ask one more question — "What is this, and do you have the documentation?" The answer you get doesn't matter; what matters is that you have this awareness. Second, when signing a transport document, check the product name carefully — if it doesn't match the actual goods, do not sign. Third, if you are investigated by public security authorities, retain a lawyer at the earliest opportunity and do not make statements on your own. During the investigation stage, a lawyer's meeting with your client is of critical importance.
If you or a loved one is facing criminal charges, a Shenzhen criminal defense lawyer can intervene as soon as possible to seek non-approval of arrest within the golden 37 days. In criminal cases, time is freedom.
A bit more explanation is needed here about the background of "red oil." Red oil refers to diesel fuel mixed with red dye that is used locally in Hong Kong. Due to the significant difference in diesel tax rates between Hong Kong and the mainland, smugglers illegally transport red oil into the mainland for sale, thereby reaping substantial price differentials. Red oil smuggling has long been a key target of Customs enforcement. Between 2021 and 2022 alone, Shenzhen Customs uncovered more than a hundred cases of red oil smuggling and seized thousands of tons of red oil. In the chain of such cases, the drivers responsible for transportation are often the most easily overlooked and the most easily used as scapegoats.
During the meeting, Attorney Deng asked Mao a question: "When you were hauling the goods, did you ever think that the oil might be smuggled?" Mao was silent for a long time before saying, "The boss said just deliver it, and don't ask about anything else. If I asked, I'd lose the job." This statement made the team realize that for lower-tier workers, "daring not to ask" is itself a form of survival pressure, and precisely for that reason, it should not be used as grounds for criminal prosecution.
This case also serves as a wake-up call for those working in the transportation industry: the widespread unwritten rule of "turning a blind eye" in the sector can turn you from an "employee" into a "suspect" if you get caught up in a smuggling case. Taking an extra look at the documents and asking one more question about the source before transport isn't being nosy—it's protecting yourself.
