The service fee refund was counter-sued for breach of contract, and Xue Suhua, a lawyer from Beijing Henglu Law Firm, represented the defendant in the second instance and rejected the appeal, maintaining the original judgment of the refund.
Learn more >
The accomplice in the POS machine fraud case was involved in the fraud of more than 290,000 yuan. Liu Liqiang, a lawyer from Beijing Henglu Law Firm, successfully defended the client and secured a suspended sentence of two years and six months after the client was convicted of fraud and sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of two years and three months.
Learn more >
The former wife and daughter did not recognize the handwritten will. Lawyers Li Yonghui and Wang Xinrui from Beijing Henglu Law Firm represented them in the case. The court ruled that 50% of the Haidian house should be inherited by the spouse.
Learn more >
The ex-husband's will bequeathing property was questioned by his children as being forged. The lawyers Xue Suhua and Wang Fangli from Beijing Hengluo Law Firm acted as his representatives. After the appraisal, the property was awarded to the donee.
Learn more >
The lending bank card was used for money laundering to conceal and hide the proceeds of crime. Attorney Wu Jiani from Beijing Henglu Law Firm successfully obtained a conditional non-prosecution for the minor C*.
Learn more >
The driver involved in the road rage incident caused minor injuries to another person. Beijing Hengluo Anqi Law Firm defended him. Under the circumstances of voluntary surrender, compensation, and reaching a settlement with the victim, the driver was sentenced to six months of detention, with the term reduced by four months.
Learn more >
A family business owner was accused of embezzlement during a divorce case. The lawyers from Beijing Henglu Law Firm, Leng Dewu and Zhu Guiying, successfully defended the client and obtained a non-arrest decision and bail release for him.
Learn more >
In the first instance, the court only recognized the loan of 270,000 yuan. In the second instance, Attorney Chen Jie from Beijing Henglu Law Firm supplemented the evidence chain and the court changed the judgment to recognize the loan of 440,000 yuan.
Learn more >
The ownership of the relocation housing was misjudged in the first instance. Attorney Wu Jiani from Beijing Henglu Law Firm represented the client in the second instance and successfully obtained the revocation of the judgment and the remand for retrial.
Learn more >
The developer fraudulently claimed insolvency and filed for bankruptcy. Liu Donghua and Nan Hui, attorneys with Beijing Henglu Law Firm, successfully rejected the bankruptcy application and protected the rights and interests of the owners.
Learn more >
The brothers each owned 50% of the property, which was later monopolized. The lawyers Li Yonghui and Fu Xiaofei from Beijing Henglu Law Firm represented them in the case, and the court awarded them 1.3 million yuan in compensation and 100,000 yuan in usage fees.
Learn more >
The house purchase and sale transaction could not be registered for 20 years. Li Yonghui, a lawyer from Beijing Henglu Law Firm, represented the client and successfully persuaded the property rights unit and the seller to assist in completing the house registration formalities.
Learn more >
After selling the house, the buyer withheld a down payment of 100,000 yuan. The case was handled by attorney He Shuang of Beijing Hengluo Shouerchao Law Firm, and the court ruled that the buyer should pay the remaining 100,000 yuan of the house price and the interest thereon.
Learn more >
The developer failed to build the house for seven years. Attorney Xiong Binrong of Beijing Henglu Law Firm represented the buyer, and the court ruled to terminate the purchase agreement and refund the buyer the purchase price of 379,000 yuan and the service fee.
Learn more >
The resettlement housing turned into a haunted house with depreciated value. Yuan Hang, a lawyer from Beijing Henglu Law Firm, represented the plaintiff, and the court ruled that the construction company and the developer should jointly compensate the plaintiff 40,000 yuan.
Learn more >
