The former public prosecutor’s office is the Shenzhen Bao’an District People’s Procuratorate.

The appellant (defendant in the original trial) Wang Haiyan, female, born on ×× month ×× year, ID number ×××3926, Han nationality, lives in ×× City, Yulin City, Guangxi ×× Autonomous Region village. Due to this case, he was detained on May 30, 2012, criminally detained the next day, arrested on July 5 of the same year, and is currently being held at the Shenzhen Baoan District Detention Center.

Litigation Records

Shenzhen Baoan District People’s Court heard that the Shenzhen Baoan District People’s Procuratorate accused Wang Haiyan, the defendant in the original trial, of committing copyright infringement, which was issued on August 24, 2012 (2012) Shenbaofazhixingchuzi Criminal Judgment No. 114. After the verdict was announced, Wang Haiyan, the defendant in the original trial, was not satisfied and appealed to this court. This court formed a collegial panel in accordance with the law. After reviewing the files, we believed that the facts of this case were clear and decided not to hold a hearing. The trial is now concluded.

Factual basis

After trial, the court of first instance found that since April 2010, the defendant Wang Haiyan, the defendant in the first instance, had been operating an electronics store located in ×× Street, Baoan District, Shenzhen City. The XX shop on the XX floor of the wholesale market sells CDs. On May 30, 2012, during an inspection, the public security police discovered that the above-mentioned shop was suspected of selling pirated optical discs. They seized 1,998 suspected pirated optical discs on the spot and arrested Wang Haiyan, the defendant in the original trial, on the spot. The Shenzhen Baoan District Audio and Video Products Appraisal Committee identified the 1,998 audio and video products involved as pirated optical discs.

The court of first instance held that the defendant Wang Haiyan, the defendant in the original instance, distributed other people's works without the permission of the copyright owner for the purpose of profit. The circumstances were serious and his behavior constituted the crime of copyright infringement. The infringing optical disc involved in the case was seized before it was actually sold, which constitutes an attempted crime and may be given a lighter or reduced punishment in accordance with the law. Since Wang Haiyan, the defendant in the original trial, was able to truthfully confess the facts of his crime after being brought to justice, and had a good attitude towards pleading guilty, and he was a first-time offender or an occasional offender, he should be given a lighter punishment as appropriate. In summary, in accordance with the provisions of Article 217, Article 23, Article 52, Article 53, and Article 64 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, infringement of For copyright crimes, the original defendant Wang Haiyan was sentenced to one year and six months in prison and fined RMB 6,000;

The seized infringing items were confiscated and turned over to the state treasury.

The appellant Wang Haiyan appealed, claiming that the facts found by the first-instance court were unclear and the sentence was too harsh; he was the breadwinner of his family and was not harmful to society, and requested the second-instance court to revoke the first-instance judgment.

After trial, it was found that the original judgment was based on the defendant's confession and defense, seizure list, search transcripts, extraction transcripts, identification transcripts, arrest process, case detection report, identity information, on-site investigation transcripts and photos. , audio-visual product appraisal certificates and other evidence, the fact that the appellant Wang Haiyan sold 1998 pirated optical discs is clear, the evidence is indeed sufficient, and this court confirms it.

This court believes that

This court believes that the appellant Wang Haiyan distributed his music, movies, television, video works, computer software and other works for profit-making purposes without the permission of the copyright owner. , the number is 1998, the circumstances are serious, and his behavior has constituted the crime of copyright infringement. In this case, the infringing optical disc involved was seized before it was actually sold. It was an attempted crime, and according to the law, the punishment can be reduced compared to the completed crime. Since the appellant Wang Haiyan truthfully confessed the facts of his crime after being brought to justice, and had a good attitude towards pleading guilty, and was a first-time offender and an occasional offender, he should be given a lighter punishment as appropriate. The court of first instance has fully considered the sentencing circumstances of the appellant, such as attempted crime, good confession attitude, and first-time offence, and made an appropriate sentence. Appellant Wang Haiyan’s request to revoke the original judgment that the sentence imposed by the first-instance court was too harsh was insufficiently justified. This court Not accepted. To sum up, the facts found in the original judgment are clear, the evidence is reliable and sufficient, the trial procedure is legal, the law is applied correctly, and the sentence is appropriate, so it should be upheld. In accordance with the provisions of Article 189, Paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, the ruling is as follows:

Judgment

The appeal is dismissed. The original judgment is upheld.

This ruling is final.

Tail of document