Former Financial Inspection Commissioner Li Jincheng (left).

(file photo)

[Reporter Wu Zhengfeng/Taipei Report] Li Jincheng, former director of the Inspection Bureau of the Financial Supervisory Commission, was involved in the "Jinyong" vulture case when he was in office in 2005. He was sentenced to 10 years by the Taipei District Court for crimes such as Yi Tuli in the first instance. The whole case has been involved in litigation for 17 years. In the fourth instance, the high court considered factors such as Li's clean record, psychological torture, and economic pressure. On the 29th, the sentence was changed to 4 years and 6 months, with deprivation of public rights for 3 years, subject to appeal.

The fourth trial pointed out that at about 1 am on March 11, 2005, when Li Jincheng was the director of the Financial Inspection Bureau, he leaked financial and investigative secrets to stock market operators Lin Mingda and Chen Junji in a lounge in Zhongshan District, Taipei City. At 11:26 p.m. on the 14th, news of Jin Jinyong’s fraudulent accounts was leaked to a reporter surnamed Gao in the lounge, and Lilin and Chen indirectly shorted Jinyong’s stock, allowing them to obtain illegal profits of 15,435,335 yuan and 15,435,335 yuan respectively. 4,717,549 yuan.

Please read on...

On May 16 of the same year, at a restaurant in Daan District, Taipei City, Li Jincheng recorded the names of head accounts such as "Naijia", "Baoyan", "Mingda", "Yunru", "Jia Qi", and "Pengxian" , the number of coupons issued, the number of coupons received, the market percentage, and the financial and investigative secrets of the ranking notes were leaked to Lin Mingda.

Furthermore, the fourth instance stated that from the time sequence of Li Jincheng's meeting with the co-defendants, gatherings, shorting (selling in securities lending), and covering (buying in securities lending) Jinyong stock, and referring to the testimony of the witnesses and the case and in the case file, Relevant materials, after comprehensive research and judgment, are sufficient to confirm that there is a considerable causal relationship between Li's behavior and the defendant in the same case who shorted the stock of Jinyong Company for profit, and violated Article 6, Item 1, Item 4 The crime of profiteering.

Due to the implicated relationship between the two crimes, he was sentenced to the heavier crime of profiteering.

The fourth trial emphasized that the crime of profit-seeking had been amended, and the first trial did not have time to compare the old and new laws, and mistakenly included the amount of Jinyong shares traded by Lin Mingda and Chen Junji before Li Jincheng leaked the secret; as for the amount of illegal profits; At 5:24, the phone call between Li Jincheng and Lin Mingda was "0 seconds", and there was no evidence to prove the leak; Li Jincheng used the media to report bad news, which caused the stock price of Yongyong to plummet, and indirectly sought the illegal interests of Lin and Chen. The crime of indirect profit-seeking was found in the first instance as direct profit-seeking, which is difficult to consider appropriate; this case is subject to the provisions of Article 7 of the Criminal Prompt Trial Law implemented on September 1, 2010, and the punishment can be reduced as appropriate. It is also illegal.

In summary, the first-instance judgment is revoked.

The fourth trial stated that Li Jincheng was the director of the Financial Inspection Bureau at the time, in charge of the securities transaction inspection business, involving the maintenance of the domestic financial transaction order and the protection of the rights and interests of the investing public, and was responsible for the national securities, banking, insurance and other financial inspections. The prosecutor of the Department of Public Security, well aware of the importance of financial inspection secrets and investigative secrets, did not keep it prudent. Just because of the friendship of friends, he continuously leaked secrets that should be kept, which caused the stock price of Jinyong to fall, and Lin and Chen obtained illegal profits of up to 2,000 yuan. More than 10,000 yuan has caused the public to have a serious sense of distrust of the Financial Inspection Bureau, affecting investors' confidence and willingness in my country's stock market, and the normal channels for companies to raise funds, which in turn affects my country's economic development.

In the fourth instance, Li Jincheng had no other criminal record, and the psychological torture and economic pressure caused by the lawsuit for more than 17 years. On the 29th, Li Jincheng was sentenced to 4 years and 6 months in prison, deprived of public rights for 3 years, and can appeal.

The members of the collegial panel in this case are divided into the presiding judge Xu Yonghuang, the accompanying judge Wu Dingya, and the appointed judge Huang Meiwen.