Typical cases of protecting cultural relics and cultural heritage in accordance with the law
1、 Case of 14 people including Jiao Mouwei stealing (cultural relics), concealing or concealing criminal gains
2、 Case of Lu and Luo intentionally damaging cultural relics
3、 Case of Zhang and Wang Moutao’s Negligent Damage to Cultural Relics
4、 11 cases involving 11 individuals including Huo Moucheng selling cultural relics, 11 cases involving disputes over property rights protection, including Yangchun Village Committee and Dongpu Village Committee in Wushan Township, Datian County, Fujian Province v. Oscar Van Ovorem
12、 Beijing Xuanfang Investment Management Group Co., Ltd. v. Lv Mouxia in the case of a dispute over the rental contract of a house
13、 Liu Mouqing and Four Others v. Ruijin Central Revolutionary Base Memorial Hall Property Rights Dispute Case
14、 Administrative Public Interest Litigation Case of Jingyu County People’s Procuratorate in Jilin Province v. Jingyu County Veterans Affairs Bureau for Failure to Fulfill Legal Duties
15、 Administrative Penalty Case of a Building Materials Co., Ltd. in Xi’an v. the Culture, Tourism and Sports Bureau of Lintong District, Xi’an City, Shaanxi Province
1、 Case of 14 people including Jiao Mouwei stealing (cultural relics), concealing or concealing criminal gains
Basic Case
From 2013 to 2017, the defendant Jiao Mouwei and 14 others formed a criminal gang to steal and sell ancient building components for illegal gain. They committed 23 crimes in more than 30 counties and districts in Shanxi, Henan, and Hebei provinces, stealing a total of 94 ancient building components. They also confiscated glazed bricks, glazed nail boards, glazed tiles, wood carvings, roof ridges, glazed lions, flower carvings, hollow carvings, roof ridge brick carvings, blue stone lions, carved blue stone gate piers, and drum stone piers Selling stone pillar foundations, wood carvings of sparrows, lion brick carvings, old-fashioned palace lanterns, etc. for a profit of 8%.740000 yuan. Most of the stolen ancient buildings were built during the Yuan, Ming, and Qing dynasties, with varying degrees of damage. Among them, there is one national key cultural relic protection unit, three provincial-level cultural relic protection units, six municipal cultural relic protection units, and one county-level cultural relic protection unit.
The referee’s result was damaged, causing serious social harm. The components of the stolen ancient buildings are identified as ordinary cultural relics. According to the provisions of the relevant judicial interpretation, five ordinary cultural relics should be regarded as Level III cultural relics of a higher level; The theft of general cultural relics and tertiary cultural relics should be separately identified as having a relatively large amount and a huge amount. According to the level and quantity of stolen cultural relics, 13 individuals including Jiao Mouwei constitute a huge amount of theft and a relatively large amount. If some defendants have recidivism, criminal record, confession, or voluntary surrender, comprehensive consideration will be given in accordance with the law. They will be sentenced to nine years to six months in prison and fined 50000 to 5000 yuan. The defendant Zhang, who knowingly purchased the stolen cultural relics, constitutes the crime of concealing or concealing the crime. He was sentenced to six months in prison and fined 5000 yuan. The illegal gains of each defendant shall be confiscated. Retrieve the stolen ancient building components and return them to the original unit.
The Intermediate People’s Court of Jincheng City, Shanxi Province upheld the original judgment in the second instance.
Typical significance
This case is a criminal case caused by the theft of cultural relics. Shanxi is an important birthplace of Chinese civilization and the Yellow River culture. Ground cultural relics account for one sixth of the stock of Chinese cultural relics, and there are 531 key protected cultural relics units in China, ranking first in the country. The task of cracking down on cultural relics crimes and strengthening cultural relics protection is even more arduous. This case belongs to a cross provincial gang crime. The defendant fled to commit the crime and used destructive means to steal nearly a hundred ancient building components, seriously endangering the safety of cultural relics and social security. The people’s court accurately grasped and strictly implemented the standard for determining the legal punishment range for theft of cultural relics stipulated in the judicial interpretation, and implemented the criminal policy of combining punishment with leniency. It not only insisted on striking hard and severely punishing crimes, but also adhered to the bottom line of the law to prevent “high” handling, and ensured that the crime, responsibility and punishment were compatible. At the same time, in the first instance judgment items, the cultural relics that should be recovered and returned should be listed one by one, without setting a time limit and being pursued to the end, to maximize the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the stolen cultural relics units. This case reflects the determination and effectiveness of the people’s court to severely punish the crime of stealing cultural relics in accordance with the law, and has exemplary significance for judicial protection, inheritance, and promotion of the Yellow River culture.
2、 Case of Lu and Luo intentionally damaging cultural relics
Basic Case.East. In April 2012, the cooperative rented approximately 200 acres of mountain forest in a village in Pingpu Town, Fanchang County, in preparation for planting herbs and nurseries. In May of the same year, Lu signed a cultural relic protection responsibility agreement with the Cultural Relics Bureau of Fanchang County, promising not to use excavators for construction operations. However, during the construction process within the scope of the mound tomb in southern Anhui, Lu and Luo still used excavators without authorization to clean the surface soil and dig trenches. In October of the same year, law enforcement personnel from the Cultural Relics Bureau of Fanchang County discovered the situation during an inspection and stopped it. After identification, the body of the mound tomb in southern Anhui was severely damaged.
【 Judgment Result 】 The sentence is three years, suspended for three years, and a fine of 10000 yuan is also imposed. The judgment has come into effect.
Typical significance
This case is a criminal case caused by intentional damage to cultural relics. The location of the incident is within the Tudun Tomb Group in southern Anhui. The tomb group and its unearthed cultural relics reflect the social production and living conditions from the Western Zhou Dynasty to the Spring and Autumn Period, and are important materials for studying the Wu Yue culture. They are of great significance for studying the relationship between the Central Plains culture and surrounding cultures during the Shang and Zhou dynasties, as well as the integration process of Chinese civilization and other major topics. Lu and Luo, after signing a cultural relic protection responsibility agreement with the Cultural Relics Bureau of Fanchang County, still knowingly committed the crime and seriously damaged the body of the mound tomb in southern Anhui. They should bear criminal responsibility in accordance with the law. While conducting trials in accordance with the law, the people’s court adopted the form of “using case statements” to preach in the Tudun Tomb Group Protection Zone in southern Anhui, guiding the public to improve their awareness and consciousness of cultural relics protection, and playing an educational role of “punishing one, warning one”. This case is a representative case of the People’s Court and the cultural relics administrative department adhering to the concept of coordinating the protection of cultural relics and economic and social development, fulfilling their duties in accordance with the law, and striving to improve the level and effectiveness of cultural relics protection by strictly and properly investigating and punishing cases that occur in the vicinity of the people and are closely related to production and life.
3、 Case of Zhang and Wang Moutao’s Negligent Damage to Cultural Relics
Basic Case.Duty of care, resulting in complete destruction of the top of an ancient tomb voucher. After identification, the excavation behavior damaged the ancient tombs of the Eastern Han Dynasty and partially damaged the original site of Luoyang City during the Han and Wei dynasties, causing serious damage to the historical, artistic, and scientific value of the ancient tombs.
On September 25, 2019, the Luoyang Cultural Relics Bureau fined a thermal engineering installation limited company in Luoyang 300000 yuan (already paid).
【 Judgment Result 】 The fact of the crime, voluntarily pleading guilty and accepting punishment, may be given a lighter punishment according to law, and shall be sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment, with a two-year probation. The judgment has come into effect.
Typical significance
This case is a criminal case caused by negligent damage to cultural relics. The ancient city of Luoyang during the Han and Wei dynasties, which lasted for nearly 1600 years, was the capital of the Eastern Zhou, Eastern Han, Cao Wei, Western Jin, and Northern Wei dynasties. It was an important window for foreign exchanges during the Han and Wei dynasties and the eastern starting point of the “Silk Road”. The existing site is one of the first batch of national key cultural relics protection units and world cultural heritage sites announced by the State Council, and has significant historical, artistic, and scientific value. Everyone has a responsibility to protect cultural relics, especially within the scope of cultural relic protection. Construction units and relevant responsible persons must operate according to regulations and fulfill their duty of care. Damaged cultural relics must bear corresponding legal responsibilities. Zhang Moujie and Wang Moutao negligently damaged and destroyed ancient tombs within the protected area of Luoyang Ancient City during construction, causing serious consequences, and shall bear criminal responsibility in accordance with the law. The construction unit has not fulfilled its management obligations and should bear corresponding administrative responsibilities. The People’s Court has implemented the criminal policy of combining leniency with severity, convicted and sentenced the two defendants in accordance with the law, and imposed administrative penalties on construction units by the cultural relics administrative department in accordance with the law. This demonstrates the clear guidance and practical results of diversified governance, comprehensive accountability, and joint improvement of cultural relics protection level. It guides the public to raise awareness of cultural relics protection, and construction units and relevant responsible persons to raise awareness of cultural relics safety responsibility, It has important warning and educational significance.
4、 11 people including Huo Moucheng sold cultural relics illegally
Basic Case.Buy, sell, and store 1 second level cultural relic and 5 third level cultural relics in the UK; Ma bought and sold 1 second level cultural relic; Ma Mouqing bought, sold, and stored 2 second level cultural relics and 6 third level cultural relics; Sun Moujie bought and sold 2 tertiary cultural relics; Lei just bought, sold, and stored 10 Level 3 cultural relics; Yuan Mouhua bought, sold, and stored 3 tertiary cultural relics; A bought and sold one third level cultural relic. 1180 other cultural relics prohibited by the state from being operated were also seized from the premises of the above-mentioned personnel.
In September 2019 and January 2020, the defendant Huo Moucheng sold one stone pestle and one stone spear he purchased in Qiketai Town, Shanshan County, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region to others through mobile auction software “Weibaitang” twice, earning a total profit of 3306 yuan. After identification, the above stone pestle and spear are all Class III cultural relics.
【 Judgment result 】
The Hami Railway Transport Court believes that the 11 defendants, including Huo Moucheng, sold or purchased, transported, or stored cultural relics prohibited by the state for profit, all constitute the crime of reselling cultural relics. Huo Moucheng and 8 others resell second level cultural relics or 5 or more third level cultural relics respectively, which is a particularly serious case; Sun Moujie and three others resell third level cultural relics, which is considered a serious case. According to the law, if 7 individuals have voluntarily surrendered, the punishment can be mitigated. Yuan Mouhua and three others have a confession and can be given lenient punishment in accordance with the law. Huo Moucheng and 11 others voluntarily signed a confession and punishment agreement. Sentenced Huo Moucheng to six years in prison and fined 50000 yuan; Sentence 10 individuals to imprisonment of three to six months, probation of four to one year, and a fine of 8000 to 2000 yuan. Retrieve the illegal gains of each defendant and confiscate the cultural relics on file. The judgment has come into effect..Managing and blocking loopholes in cultural relic protection work provides legal guidance.
5、 Cases of 12 people including Yao Mouzhong robbing, robbing and excavating ancient cultural sites, ancient tombs, and reselling cultural relics
【 Basic Case 】 Longcheng District and Ningcheng County, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region have repeatedly stolen and excavated ancient cultural sites and tombs. One of the stolen sites is an ancient site from the lower cultural period of Xiajiadian in the Bronze Age, one is a tomb from the upper cultural period of Xiajiadian in the Bronze Age, and 17 are stone mounds from the Neolithic Hongshan Culture. Among them, three are located within the scope of the Niuheliang Site Protection Area, a national key cultural relic protection unit. After identification, the act of illegal excavation has caused serious damage to the cultural relics and historical features of ancient cultural sites and tombs, as well as the loss of historical information; One pair of stolen jade bracelets, one double linked bi, one hook cloud shaped jade pendant, one jade bracelet, and one jade hoop, all of which are first-class cultural relics of the Hongshan Culture during the Neolithic Age..50000 yuan. The excavation of ancient cultural sites and tombs with historical, artistic, and scientific value constitutes the crime of stealing and excavating ancient cultural sites and tombs. Yao Mouzhong and others have repeatedly stolen and excavated ancient cultural sites and tombs, identified as national key cultural relics protection units, and stolen precious cultural relics. In the joint crime, Yao and 7 others were the main culprits, while the other 4 were accomplices. Yao and Li, with the purpose of making profits, resell cultural relics prohibited by the state, both constitute the crime of reselling cultural relics, and the circumstances are particularly serious. Several crimes committed by Yao and others shall be punished in accordance with the law. Yao Mouzhong’s decision to carry out the death penalty with a two-year reprieve, deprivation of political rights for life, and confiscation of all personal property; Other defendants shall be sentenced or decided to be sentenced to life imprisonment, deprivation of political rights for life, and confiscation of all personal property, ranging from two years’ imprisonment, three years’ probation, and a fine of 20000 yuan.
The Liaoning Provincial Higher People’s Court upheld the conviction and sentencing of each defendant in the first instance.
Typical significance
This case is a criminal case caused by the theft and excavation of ancient cultural sites, ancient tombs, and the sale and robbery of cultural relics. The Hongshan culture is one of the important symbols of the origin of Chinese civilization, and its Niuheliang site provides strong material evidence for tracing back thousands of years of Chinese civilization history, with extremely important historical and cultural value. This case is one of a series of cases involving the theft and excavation of the Niuheliang Hongshan Cultural Site. The People’s Court has formed a specialized criminal gang in response to this case, implementing a “one-stop” operation of providing funds, investing in equipment, exploring ancient tombs, robbing tombs, and selling and sharing stolen goods. The number of cultural relics involved in the case is numerous, and the amount of illegal profits is huge. In combination with the level of cultural relics, the damage caused to ancient cultural sites and tombs, As well as factors such as the number of times each defendant participated in the crime and their role in the joint crime, we will adhere to the law and strike hard, comprehensively crack down on cultural relic criminal networks, severely punish the first offenders of cultural relic criminal gangs, and completely cut off the chain of cultural relic crimes. This case reflects the determination and effectiveness of the people’s court to punish and prevent cultural relics crimes in accordance with the law, maintain the safety of cultural heritage, and demonstrate its responsibility to provide strong judicial protection for the inheritance and promotion of Chinese civilization.
6、 Liao Moushang and Three Others Excavate an Ancient Tomb
Basic Case.Li Mousheng and Wu Mouqiang (on the run), after prior planning and agreement, carried metal detectors and shovels and other tools to a group of ancient tombs near a village in Ji’ai Township, Luocheng Mulao Autonomous County, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region for excavation. One of the ancient tombs was excavated and items such as tile altars and wooden strips were taken out. After identification, the stolen and excavated tomb is one of the ancient tombs of the Liao family in the Qing Dynasty, and it is the tomb of Liao Mouzhong, the sixth generation of the Liao family; The tomb complex is well preserved, with local characteristics in shape and inscriptions. The inscriptions are clear and have important value for studying the history of local population migration and ethnic integration. It is an immovable cultural relic protected by law.
The verdict is that all are the main offenders. All three defendants have a confession and voluntarily plead guilty to punishment, and may be given a lighter punishment according to law; If he voluntarily compensates the Liao family members and shows signs of repentance, he may be given a lighter punishment at his discretion, with imprisonment of one year and four months, and a fine of 5000 yuan.
The Intermediate People’s Court of Hechi City, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region upheld the original judgment in the second instance.
Typical significance
This case is a criminal case caused by the theft and excavation of ancient tombs. According to the relevant judicial interpretation, the ancient cultural sites and ancient tombs protected by the criminal law are not limited to those declared as immovable cultural relics; The act of illegal excavation that damages the historical, artistic, or scientific value of ancient cultural sites or tombs constitutes a completed crime. Although the Liao family’s ancient tomb complex in the Qing Dynasty was not declared an immovable cultural relic, it is still protected by law. Each defendant, knowing that it was an ancient tomb, carried out illegal excavation, causing irreversible damage to the integrity of the tomb itself. Even if no valuable cultural relics were stolen, they should be subject to corresponding criminal sanctions. The People’s Court has implemented the criminal policy of combining leniency with severity, and held the three defendants criminally responsible in accordance with the law. This reflects a clear stance of comprehensively maintaining the safety of cultural relics, and has a positive significance in guiding the public to correctly understand the value of legally protected ancient tombs, creating a common social atmosphere for protection, and warning and deterring folk tomb theft activities.
7、 Criminal and Civil Public Interest Litigation Case of Wang and Three Others Stealing and Excavating Ancient Tombs
Basic Case.The research value of illegal excavation has caused direct and serious damage to the ancient tomb itself..59 yuan.
【 Judgment result 】 Mild punishment. All three defendants plead guilty and accept punishment, and may be dealt with leniently in accordance with the law; Full compensation has been made for the repair costs and evaluation and appraisal costs of the stolen ancient tomb, and a lighter punishment may be imposed as appropriate. Sentence to imprisonment of 11 years, 3 months to 9 years, and a fine of 1.20000 to 9000 yuan. The confiscated stolen goods shall be confiscated, and the three defendants shall be ordered to refund or compensate for the unrecovered stolen goods (or discounted funds) based on their respective participation in the crime; Order the three defendants to withdraw from the proceeds of the sale of stolen goods that have been recovered in this case.
The Intermediate People’s Court of Suzhou City, Jiangsu Province upheld the original judgment in the second instance. The heavy destruction has also caused damage to the natural and cultural environment of ancient tomb groups. At the same time as initiating public prosecution, the procuratorial organs shall file incidental civil public interest litigation in accordance with the law. The people’s court adheres to the strict determination of the statutory penalty range in accordance with the law, resolutely punishes tomb theft, and pays attention to the use of restorative judicial rules, encourages defendants to actively compensate for public welfare losses, promotes timely restoration of ancient tombs and surrounding environments, supports defendants and procuratorial organs in reaching civil compensation agreements in accordance with the law, and considers the defendant’s full compensation as an important factor for determining a lighter punishment. The legal trial of this case has implemented the requirements of comprehensive accountability and coordination of criminal and civil responsibilities, highlighting the judicial value orientation of promoting the integrated protection of historical and cultural heritage, natural and cultural environment with the strictest system and the strictest rule of law.
8、 Criminal and Civil Public Interest Litigation Case Involving 15 People, including Sun Moulin, Stealing and Excavating Ancient Tombs
Basic Case
From 2016 to 2017, the defendant Sun Moulin and 15 others, through cross collusion and prior planning, carried out multiple excavations at the northeast corner and east platform of Xuewei No.1 Tomb in the hot water tomb group in Dulan County, Qinghai Province, as well as at the Xuewei Ranch (commonly known as the sheepfold tomb), and stole a large number of cultural relics. Among them, the profit from selling one metal bowl was over 200000 yuan, and the profit from selling over 50 grams of patterned gold plates was over 20000 yuan. After identification, the stolen ancient tombs belong to the Tang Dynasty Tubo tombs, which are important components of the national key cultural relic protection units – the Hot Water Tomb Group in Dulan County and the Xia Yama Kebu Site. Among the 646 cultural relics seized, there were 14 groups and 16 first-level cultural relics, 49 groups and 77 second-level cultural relics, 132 third-level cultural relics, and 421 general cultural relics.
The illegal excavation in the northeast corner of the Xuewei No.1 tomb caused damage to the first phase of the ground wave detection and security project, resulting in a repair cost of 40%.640000 yuan. The excavation of the stolen hole in the sheepfold tomb resulted in a backfilling cost of 2400 yuan. The People’s Procuratorate of Haixi Mongols and Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture of Qinghai Province filed an incidental civil public interest lawsuit, requesting that Sun Moulin and other defendants be ordered to bear the above costs and the costs incurred in carrying out rescue excavation and building protective sheds for ancient tombs..880000 yuan, with each defendant being sentenced to pay 81498 yuan respectively.18 yuan to 218 yuan.It varies from 18 yuan.
The second instance of the Qinghai Provincial High People’s Court upheld the conviction of each defendant in the first instance and the sentencing of 13 others, including Sun Moulin, and changed the sentence of the other two defendants; Maintain other judgments of the first instance judgment. Graded tombs have important value in studying the history and culture of the Tang Dynasty’s Tubo region, the relationship between the Tang and Tubo regions, and the integration of ethnic exchanges. The illegal excavation behavior of Sun Moulin and others seriously damages the structure of ancient tombs, seriously damages the historical, artistic, and scientific value of ancient tombs, and seriously damages the national and social public interests. The people’s court, while strictly punishing the crime of robbing and excavating ancient tombs in accordance with the law, correctly implements the principles of bearing responsibility for damages and comprehensive compensation, reasonably determines the scope of civil liability in accordance with the law, comprehensively considers the criminal and civil responsibilities of each defendant, and makes a clear judgment to transfer all cultural relics on record to the cultural relics administrative department. This case reflects the firm determination and responsibility of the People’s Court to severely punish major cultural relics crimes in accordance with the law, promote the integrated protection and systematic governance of cultural relics and the environment, and has significant positive significance for protecting and inheriting the historical and cultural heritage of ethnic minorities, inspiring the confidence and self-improvement of all Chinese culture.
9、 Civil Public Interest Litigation Case of Jiangkou County People’s Procuratorate in Guizhou Province v. Chen Mouping for Ecological Destruction
Basic Case
On July 11, 2021, Chen Mouping was queuing at the Fanjing Mountain Scenic Area in Guizhou to reach the Jinding of Fanjing Mountain. He used a climbing cane to carve on the stone wall of the provincial-level cultural relic protection unit – “Fanjing Mountain Jinding Cliff”. Despite reminders and dissuasions from other tourists, Chen Mouping still insists on leaving the words “Lishui Chen Country” engraved on the stone wall. After identification, the carving behavior caused irreversible damage to the above-mentioned cultural relics and landscape value, resulting in an economic loss of over 50000 yuan. After entrusting relevant institutions to develop a repair plan, the repair cost is 60952.08 yuan, survey and design fee 38000 yuan. The People’s Procuratorate of Jiangkou County, Guizhou Province has filed a civil public interest lawsuit, requesting that Chen Mouping bear the above-mentioned repair costs, survey and design costs, as well as punitive damages of 50000 yuan, and apologize to the public.
【 Judgment result 】.08 yuan, 38000 yuan for survey and design fees, 25000 yuan for punitive damages to the ecological environment, and apologized to the public for his illegal behavior on national news media.
The Intermediate People’s Court of Tongren City, Guizhou Province upheld the original judgment in the second instance.
An inseparable part. Chen Mouping’s carving behavior not only caused irreversible damage to cultural relics, devalued the artistic and scientific research value of the relics, damaged the overall ecological environment of the scenic area, but also infringed on social and public interests, resulting in serious negative social impacts. The People’s Court adhered to the principle of responsibility for damage and comprehensive compensation, implemented the damage relief system centered on ecological environmental remediation, took overall consideration of the organic connection of civil and administrative responsibilities, and realized the coordination and unity of punishing violations, compensating losses and repairing the environment. This case is a vivid practice of the People’s Court in adhering to the strictest system and the strictest rule of law to promote the integrated protection and systematic governance of cultural relics, historical sites, and ecological environment. It is of great significance in guiding the public to abandon bad habits such as engraving, graffiti, climbing, and trampling, establishing the concept of civilized travel, and creating a new trend of ecological civilization construction.
10、 Civil Public Interest Litigation Case of Baoding City People’s Procuratorate in Hebei Province v. A Stone Processing Co., Ltd. in Yixian County for Ecological Environment Protection
Basic Case.81 yuan; After developing a partition repair plan, the total repair cost is 717876.13 yuan, takes 2 years. The People’s Procuratorate of Baoding City, Hebei Province has filed a civil public interest lawsuit, requesting that the stone company immediately cease the infringement and demolish its stone processing plant within a specified time limit, repair the ecological environment or compensate for the above-mentioned restoration costs, compensate for the ecological function loss of the aforementioned forest land, pay equal punitive damages for ecological damage, bear the appraisal fees of this case, and publicly apologize in national media.
The infringement of the judgment result and national sentiment shall bear corresponding legal responsibilities in accordance with the law. Its behavior originated before the implementation of the Civil Code, and the harmful consequences have continued, causing serious damage to social and public interests. It should bear punitive compensation in accordance with the law. According to the law, the stone company immediately stops infringing on the historical and environmental features, as well as the ecological environment of the cultural relics within the protection area of the “Ming Great Wall Zijingguan Section” Zijingguan, and demolishes its stone processing plant located within the protection area and construction control zone of the Great Wall; According to the repair plan and repair period determined by the appraisal opinions, the damaged ecological environmental remediation shall be repaired to the state and function before the damage occurs. If the repair work cannot be completed on schedule, the ecological environmental remediation repair cost shall be compensated 717876.13 yuan; Compensation for loss of ecological and environmental functions of forest land 528397.81 yuan and pay a punitive compensation of 528397 for ecological damage.81 yuan; Apologize to the public in national media; Bear the appraisal fee of 40000 yuan. The judgment has come into effect. Cultural heritage. The Zijingguan section of the Ming Great Wall is a national key cultural relic protection unit. The stone company illegally constructed and operated within the scope of Zijingguan protection, damaging the history and environmental landscape of the Great Wall. Despite two administrative penalties, it still did not rectify. The People’s Court actively practices the concept of ecological civilization in the new era, actively focuses on the major deployment of the Central Committee on the construction of the Great Wall National Cultural Park, implements the principles of responsibility for damages and comprehensive compensation, and legally recognizes the civil liabilities of stone companies, achieving the unity of political, legal, social, and ecological effects. In order to consolidate and improve the judicial protection capability of the Great Wall, the People’s Court took the successful trial of this case as an opportunity to select and construct the first Great Wall ecological environmental remediation judicial protection (education) base in the Zijingguan section of the Great Wall, actively play the role of environmental resources trial function, and strive to promote the integrated protection and systematic governance of the Great Wall itself, its cultural heritage, and the ecological environment.
11、 Case of Property Rights Protection Dispute between Yangchun Village Committee and Dongpu Village Committee in Wushan Township, Datian County, Fujian Province v. Oscar Van Ovorem
Basic Case
The ancestral belief is an important religious belief in the southern Fujian region, and it is a custom in the region to shape the ancestral body into a physical statue and offer it for worship. Grandfather Zhang was born in the 11th to 12th centuries and practiced and became a monk at Qinglong Mountain Taoist Temple in Yangchun, Fujian. The ancestors of the Lin family built the Puzhao Hall in the Song Dynasty to worship the statue of Duke Zhang, and the statue of Duke Zhang has been worshipped by the local people and continues to this day. The Puzhao Hall and the statue of Zhang Gong’s ancestor worshipped belong to the collective property of Yangchun Village and Dongpu Village in Wushan Township, Datian County, Fujian Province. In 1995, the statue of Grandpa Zhang was stolen, but the case has not been solved yet. In March 2015, Oscar, a resident of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, exhibited a Chinese Song Dynasty Buddha statue in Hungary. After comparing the photos and ancestral relics of the villagers in two villages, it was found that the Buddha statue was a stolen statue of Grandpa Zhang. The village committee of the two villages claimed to Oscar for the return, but the lawsuit was rejected in the Dutch court. In December 2015, they filed a lawsuit with the Intermediate People’s Court of Sanming City, Fujian Province, requesting Oscar and the two companies solely owned by Oscar to return the statue of Mr. Zhang and pay a mental damage compensation of 200000 euros and a debt realization fee of 50000 euros.
Judgment Result
The Intermediate People’s Court of Sanming City, Fujian Province held in the first instance that the Buddha statue involved in the case is identical to the Song Dynasty ancestor statue of Duke Zhang that was stolen and lost in Puzhao Hall, Yangchun Village, Wushan Township, Datian County, Fujian Province in 1995. This case should.When applying the law of the place where the theft occurred, which is the law of the People’s Republic of China, Oscar’s purchase behavior is not subject to the system of good faith acquisition. The statue of Duke Zhang in the Netherlands is only a cultural relic with exotic characteristics, but in China, where the statue was born and preserved, it is an important keepsake of the local ancestral faith, carrying the spiritual sustenance of many local believers. As a collectively owned cultural relic, the ancestral statue of Duke Zhang is legally protected by the collective ownership of villagers in Yangchun and Dongpu villages; As a keepsake of the ancestral belief, in terms of affection, the statue of Duke Zhang should be returned to the believers and villagers; As a cultural property of human remains, in theory, the statue of Duke Zhang should also return to its original cultural atmosphere and local environment. After the statue of Zhang Gongzu was stolen and illegally exported to foreign countries without the permission of the Chinese government, the Yangchun Village Committee and Dongpu Village Committee have the right to exercise ownership on behalf of the collective, pursue cross-border claims, and demand that the illegal possessor return the lost precious cultural relics. According to the law, Oscar returned the physical Buddha statue of Grandpa Zhang to the Yangchun and Dongpu village committees, and rejected other litigation requests from the two village committees.
The Fujian Provincial Higher People’s Court upheld the original judgment in the second instance.
Typical significance
This case is a foreign-related civil case triggered by a dispute over the property rights of cultural relics. It is a groundbreaking case for the private sector to pursue the loss of overseas cultural relics through domestic civil litigation. It has exemplary significance in exploring judicial rules for foreign-related cultural relics, and coordinating the promotion of domestic and foreign rule of law. One is to declare the extraterritorial application of China’s cultural relics laws. For the first time, it is clear that the law on the location of stolen cultural relics is applicable to the loss of overseas cultural relics, effectively safeguarding the interests of cultural logistics when going abroad. Secondly, it demonstrates China’s firm stance in safeguarding international treaties on cultural property. Fully respect the spirit of the cultural property treaty on “protecting cultural property from theft, secret excavation, and illegal export” and “facilitating the return and return of cultural relics”, and provide an interpretation of domestic law that is consistent with the purpose and purpose of international treaties. The third is to provide judicial support for blocking the overseas loss of cultural relics in China. From the perspectives of prohibitive regulations on foreign trade and exit of cultural relics, as well as the cultural property attribute of Buddha statues as human remains in the case, it is clarified that the purchase of stolen cultural relics does not apply the system of good faith acquisition. This provides strong legal support for parties to pursue overseas cultural relics through civil litigation, and also has a warning and preventive effect on the sale of cultural relics overseas.
12、 Beijing Xuanfang Investment Management Group Co., Ltd. v. Lv Mouxia in the case of a dispute over the rental contract of a house
Basic Case.Authorized by the door, exercise all operational and management rights of directly managed public housing. In December 2015, the Beijing Municipal Bureau of Cultural Relics issued a letter to the People’s Government of Xicheng District, Beijing, announcing the implementation of protection measures for the Yangjiaoshan Temple (Songyun An), a cultural relic protection unit in Beijing. Subsequently, the Xuanfang Company announced the policies and plans for housing vacation. The two parties in this case were unable to reach an agreement on the issue of vacating public housing and compensation and resettlement. Xuanfang Company filed a lawsuit with the Xicheng District People’s Court of Beijing, requesting a decree to terminate the lease contract of the public housing involved in the case. Lv and her daughter Chen vacated the public housing and demolished the self built housing. In the lawsuit, Xuanfang Company provided a house at No. 1 Daotian 1st Road, Fangshan District, Beijing for the two people to temporarily move and reside.
【 Judgment Result 】 Moving cultural relics. As a management unit of public housing, Xuanfang Company has the right to fulfill its cultural relic protection responsibilities in accordance with the law. In accordance with the official letter of the Xicheng District People’s Government of Beijing and with the consent of relevant government authorities, it has formulated a relocation plan and negotiated with Lv Mouxia for the relocation of the house. In the event that both parties fail to reach an agreement on the evacuation agreement, based on relevant legal provisions, Xuanfang Company has the right to request the termination of the contract, but at the same time, it should protect the legitimate residential interests of the other party. After investigation, Xuanfang Company has provided appropriate housing for Lv Mouxia’s party, and it can be determined that they are eligible for retirement. For resettlement and compensation issues, the parties shall negotiate separately and handle them in accordance with the law. Judgment in accordance with the law: Confirming the termination of the public housing lease contract currently being performed by Lv Mouxia and Xuanfang Company; Lv and Chen vacated the public housing involved in the case and handed it over to Xuanfang Company, while also moving to the revolving housing provided by Xuanfang Company for living; The case acceptance fee shall be borne by Xuanfang Company.
The Beijing Second Intermediate People’s Court upheld the original judgment in the second instance..This case highlights the mission and responsibility of the people’s court to serve the overall situation in accordance with the law and maintain the protection of the ancient capital style in the core area of the capital. It provides a reference sample for strengthening the judicial protection of immovable cultural relics clusters and handling similar cases.
13、 Liu Mouqing and Four Others v. Ruijin Central Revolutionary Base Memorial Hall Property Rights Dispute Case
Basic Case: In “Da Bai Di”, the phrase “In the fierce battle of the past, the village wall in front of the bullet hole” is reminiscent of this period of history. During the land reform period, the government of Ruijin County distributed the two houses (hereinafter referred to as the “two houses” in front of the “bullet hole” village wall “) and other properties of the Red Fourth Army’s Dabaidi Battle Battlefield site to Liu Mouren, Liu Mouqing, Liu Mouxiang (cutting Heke), Liu Mouhua (Liu Moudi), and Ma Moulian, and issued the” Land and Property Ownership Certificate “on March 10, 1953. Afterwards, Liu Mouren handed over the “bullet hole” two rooms to his younger brother Liu Moupan for residence. In 1969, the Ruijin Central Revolutionary Base Memorial Hall took over the “bullet hole” two rooms from Liu Moupan and carried out partial repairs. On April 15, 2007, in the inscription “Introduction to the Battle Battlefield Site of the Red Fourth Army’s Dabaidi”, it was stated that the site was originally “Liu Moupan’s private residence”. Liu Mouqing, Liu Mouxiang, Liu Mouxu, and Liu Mouhua are children born to Liu Mouren and Ma Moulian. After learning about the content of the inscription, they filed a lawsuit with the People’s Court of Ruijin City, Jiangxi Province, requesting an order to return the “bullet hole” and two houses. During the trial, Liu Mouqing and others changed the litigation request and requested a decree to change Liu Moupan in the inscription to Liu Mouren, Liu Mouqing, Suohe Ke, Liu Moudi, and Ma Moulian.
【 Judgment result 】
The People’s Court of Ruijin City, Jiangxi Province believes that during the land reform period, the “bullet hole” and “two houses” were allocated by the government to Liu Mouren, Liu Mouqing, Liu Mouxiang (cutting Heke), Liu Mouhua (Liu Moudi), and Ma Moulian according to the land policy at that time, and no further changes were registered after obtaining the “Land and Property Ownership Certificate”. The Da Bai Di Battle Battlefield Site of the Red Fourth Army is a national key cultural relic protection unit. The “bullet hole” and “two rooms” in this site are cultural relics under national key protection, and no one is allowed to damage them. The cultural relic protection unit should properly manage it. There is indeed an error in the introduction of the inscription that the site was originally “Liu Moupan’s private residence”, and it should be corrected. According to the law, the Ruijin Central Revolutionary Base Memorial Hall has changed the name of “Liu Moupan” in the inscription “Introduction to the Battle Battlefield Site of the Red Fourth Army’s Dabaidi” in front of the “Bullet Hole” to “Liu Mouren, Liu Mouqing, Suohe Ke, Liu Moudi, Ma Moulian”. The judgment has come into effect.
Typical significance.The significance of revolutionary culture and the inheritance of red genes is significant. Liu Mouqing and others sued and advocated for the return of the “bullet hole” two houses, rooted in their belief that the name of the Central Plains residents in the inscription was incorrect, resulting in damage to their own rights and interests. The main purpose of the lawsuit is still to “correct the name”. The people’s court, based on the principle of seeking truth from facts, takes into account the strengthening of the protection and inheritance of revolutionary cultural relics and the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the parties involved, strengthens the interpretation and analysis of the law, and promotes the proper resolution of conflicts and disputes. This case is a vivid exploration by the people’s court to provide strong judicial protection for the protection of revolutionary cultural relics. It has accumulated useful experience for enriching and improving the judicial judgment rules for cultural relics, guiding the public to comprehensively and correctly establish the concept of cultural relics protection, and urging cultural relics protection units to enhance their sense of responsibility to respect history and pay attention to details. It has promotional and educational significance.
14、 Administrative Public Interest Litigation Case of Jingyu County People’s Procuratorate in Jilin Province v. Jingyu County Veterans Affairs Bureau for Failure to Fulfill Legal Duties
Basic Case
General Yang Jingyu died in Baoan Village, Mengjiang Township, Jingyu County, Baishan City, Jilin Province. It is a national patriotism education base and a provincial key martyr memorial and protection unit. In 2020, the Standing Committee of Baishan Municipal People’s Congress specially promulgated the Regulations on the Protection of the Place where General Yang Jingyu died in Baishan City to regulate the protection, management and utilization of the place where General Yang Jingyu died in the country, which clearly stipulates that the department in charge of affairs for retired soldiers in Jingyu County is responsible for the daily protection and management of the place where General Yang Jingyu died in the country. In performing its duties, the People’s Procuratorate of Jingyu County found that there were amusement parks, barbecue houses, cruise ships and other business activities in the place where General Yang Jingyu died, which affected the promotion of patriotism and damaged the social and public interests. Therefore, it issued a procuratorial recommendation to the Bureau of Retired Military Affairs of Jingyu County, asking it to fully perform its protection and management responsibilities, and legally commemorate the catering, entertainment, picnic, camping, fishing, etc. within the protection area of General Yang Jingyu’s martyrdom Conduct supervision on the behaviors irrelevant to and harmful to the environment when paying homage to and mourning for the martyrs, order correction, and restore the solemn and solemn environment atmosphere of General Yang Jingyu’s martyrdom. The Jingyu County Veterans Affairs Bureau failed to fulfill its duties as required, and the Jingyu County People’s Procuratorate filed an administrative public interest lawsuit with the Jingyu County People’s Court. During the trial, all entertainment facilities involved in the case were dismantled, and the Jingyu County People’s Procuratorate applied to withdraw the lawsuit.
【 Judgment result 】
The People’s Court of Jingyu County, Jilin Province believes that the Jingyu County Retired Soldiers Affairs Bureau has actively rectified, fulfilled its duties, and achieved the protection of public interests. The Jingyu County People’s Procuratorate voluntarily applied for the withdrawal of the prosecution, which complies with legal provisions and has ruled to allow the withdrawal of the prosecution.
Typical significance.The concept of governance and source governance extends the judicial function in accordance with the law, strengthens communication and coordination with procuratorial organs and administrative departments, supervises the rectification situation, promotes the formation of a joint force for cultural relics protection, and promotes timely and appropriate resolution of various issues. The legal trial of this case effectively safeguarded the honor and dignity of heroes and martyrs, accumulated exploratory experience in strengthening the judicial protection of revolutionary cultural relics and red cultural heritage, and promoted the comprehensive performance of duties by relevant administrative organs in accordance with the law, as well as the protection, inheritance, and reasonable utilization of hero and martyr memorial facilities. It has exemplary significance and guiding value.
15、 Administrative Penalty Case of a Building Materials Co., Ltd. in Xi’an v. the Culture, Tourism and Sports Bureau of Lintong District, Xi’an City, Shaanxi Province
In March of that year, the Lintong Branch of the Xi’an Planning Bureau in Shaanxi Province reported the clue to the Lintong District Bureau of Culture, Tourism and Sports (hereinafter referred to as the Lintong Bureau of Culture and Tourism). On the 17th of the same month, the Lintong Cultural and Tourism Bureau filed an investigation into the construction materials company’s “unauthorized construction without the approval of the cultural relics department” and ordered the construction materials company to demolish and restore its original appearance within a specified period of time. Afterwards, the Lintong Cultural and Tourism Bureau twice served administrative penalty notices and hearing notices to the building materials company, and organized hearings in accordance with the law according to the application of the building materials company, fulfilling legal procedures. In the meantime, the the Mausoleum of the First Qin Emperor Museum replied to the consultation letter of Lintong Culture and Tourism Bureau twice, saying that the construction of the building materials company has affected the safety of the the Mausoleum of the First Qin Emperor cultural relics and the surrounding historical landscape, damaged the authenticity and integrity of the the Mausoleum of the First Qin Emperor cultural relics, and considered that it is not appropriate to carry out construction projects unrelated to cultural relics protection in this area. On March 11, 2019, the Lintong Cultural and Tourism Bureau made an administrative penalty decision, determining that the building materials company violated the provisions of the Cultural Relics Protection Law, ordering it to demolish illegal buildings, and imposing a fine of 300000 yuan. The building materials company is not satisfied and has filed a lawsuit with the Xi’an Railway Transport Court.
【 Judgment result 】
The Xi’an Railway Transport Court held in the first instance that the Cultural Relics Protection Law clearly stipulates that no unit or individual shall carry out other construction projects or operations such as blasting, drilling, and excavation within the protection scope of cultural relics protection units without approval. The building materials company did not apply to the cultural relics administrative department for approval, and carried out construction projects within the protection scope of the Mausoleum of the First Qin Emperor without authorization, in violation of the provisions of the Cultural Relics Protection Law. The Lintong Bureau of Culture and Tourism has determined that the facts are clear, the evidence is conclusive and sufficient, the procedure is legal, and the applicable laws and regulations are correct. The judgment rejects the lawsuit request of the building materials company.
The Intermediate Court of Xi’an Railway Transport upheld the original judgment in the second instance..National key cultural relics protection units have extremely significant historical, artistic, and scientific value. The building materials company is unauthorized to carry out project construction within the protection scope of the the Mausoleum of the First Qin Emperor, which affects the safety and historical features of the the Mausoleum of the First Qin Emperor’s cultural relics and damages the authenticity and integrity of the the Mausoleum of the First Qin Emperor’s cultural relics, and should bear administrative responsibility according to law. The cultural relics administrative department has made administrative penalty decisions on building materials companies in accordance with the law, and the people’s court has supervised and supported the cultural relics administrative department to strictly enforce the law, forming an effective joint force to crack down on illegal activities and protect cultural relics. Throughout the entire process from clue discovery to judicial judgment in this case, the people’s court, cultural relics administrative departments, cultural relics units, and relevant administrative departments worked in multiple ways, performed their duties in accordance with the law, and each fulfilled their responsibilities. This is a successful example of jointly building a legal barrier for the protection of cultural relics and cultural heritage in the new era.