According to Xinkuaibao, the Jieyang Intermediate People's Court in Guangdong Province recently concluded a gambling case, upholding the first-instance sentence that condemned Xu Moujian to 1 year in prison for organizing gambling and imposed a fine of 5,000 yuan.

The court found that on June 10, 2021, co-defendant Xu Mouxiong (previously convicted) created a WeChat group as a shareholders' group for illegal gambling on Euro Cup football matches and invited Xu Moujian and others to join so that shareholders could timely post betting slips, reconcile accounts, and settle winnings and losses. The gambling operation had a total of 12 shares, with Xu Moujian holding approximately 1 share. Xu Mouxiong also opened an online gambling agency account and sub-accounts, which he and some shareholders provided to bettors for wagering.

By June 21 of that year, the shareholders' group was dissolved after receiving over 1 million yuan in Euro Cup football bets. The online gambling agency lost 60,500 yuan, while handwritten betting slips won 59,214 yuan, resulting in a total profit of 28,964 yuan after settlement. Each shareholder received dividends based on their shares, and Xu Moujian received a WeChat transfer of 1,448 yuan on that day.

On February 7, 2023, after learning that co-defendant Xu Mouxiong had been detained by public security authorities for gambling, Xu Moujian voluntarily surrendered to the police station.

After trial, the first-instance court sentenced Xu Moujian to 1 year in prison for the crime of organizing gambling and imposed a fine of 5,000 yuan.

Xu Moujian appealed the first-instance sentence to the Jieyang Intermediate People's Court.

After hearing the appeal, the court determined that based on confessions from multiple co-defendants and evidence such as WeChat chat logs and transfer records, there was sufficient proof that Xu Moujian and his co-defendants, for profit, organized gambling on Euro Cup matches. Their actions constituted the crime of organizing gambling. Although Xu Moujian voluntarily surrendered after the incident, he did not truthfully confess to the principal facts of the crime and therefore could not be deemed a genuine voluntary surrender. However, given that he did voluntarily surrender, the court exercised discretion to impose a reduced sentence. The original sentence had clear facts, correct application of law, appropriate sentencing, and lawful procedural processes. The second-instance court therefore legally rendered a final judgment, dismissing the appeal and upholding the original sentence.

Tradotto dall'IA.

Il sito web di AF è ora online! Notizie complete, commenti, dettagli delle partite e statistiche sul tuo computer. Visita: www.allfootballapp.com