Fined 110000 yuan? The court has ruled!, The vegetable seller earns 21 yuan in administrative fees | fine | court

Selling vegetables earns a profit of 21.05 yuan

But was fined and merged with 110000 yuan?

Recently, a tricycle vegetable seller in Xigong District, Luoyang City

Due to sales of substandard vegetables

Received a "sky high" penalty ticket

This administrative non litigation case has taken effect

The court ruled against compulsory execution

On the 30th, related topics appeared on Weibo's hot search

Causing heated discussions among netizens

Vegetable farmers fined 110000 yuan

Court: No enforcement granted

The vegetable vendor Jiang wholesale a batch of ginger, spinach, and green peppers from a large wholesale market in Luoyang for sale. The batch of vegetables was inspected by administrative authorities as exceeding pesticide residue standards, with a sales revenue of 198.4 yuan and a profit of 21.05 yuan. The administrative agency imposed a fine of 55000 yuan and an additional fine of 55000 yuan on its vegetable stall, and later applied to the Xigong Court for compulsory enforcement.

After examination by the People's Court of Xigong District, it was found that the unqualified ginger, spinach, and green peppers sold by Jiang's vegetable stall were purchased from a large wholesale market in Luoyang, and he had reason to believe that the purchased products met food safety standards. Moreover, the total sales revenue of the ginger, spinach, and green peppers purchased and sold by Jiang's vegetable stall was only 198.4 yuan. The administrative authority in this case did not consider that Jiang's vegetable stall was a first-time violation of the law and had no subjective intention. He also actively cooperated with the investigation and did not cause actual harmful consequences. The punishment for Jiang's vegetable stall was too heavy and violated the principle of equivalent punishment. The punishment was clearly inappropriate.

During the process, the Xigong Court utilized the Xigong District Administrative Dispute Diversification Prevention and Resolution Center to organize multiple mediation sessions between the parties involved. Due to the inability of both parties to reach a consensus, the final court ruling does not grant compulsory execution. Subsequently, the administrative agency filed an application for reconsideration, and the second instance court ruled to reject the application and uphold the original ruling.

The relevant person in charge of the Xigong District Court introduced that after the effectiveness of this case, the Xigong Court issued judicial suggestions in response to the problems discovered during the trial process, and made suggestions on the improvement of administrative discretion standards by relevant administrative agencies, promoting fair, civilized, and humanized law enforcement.

The presiding judge in this case stated that Article 64 of the Food Safety Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that wholesale markets for edible agricultural products should be equipped with inspection equipment and personnel, or entrust food inspection institutions that comply with the provisions of this law to conduct sampling inspections on the edible agricultural products sold in the wholesale market. Article 33 of the Administrative Penalty Law stipulates that if the illegal act is minor and timely corrected without causing harmful consequences, no administrative penalty shall be imposed. Those who violate the law for the first time with minor consequences and make timely corrections may not be subject to administrative penalties.

"Serious punishment for minor offenses" is not an isolated case

Difficulty in obtaining support for mechanical law enforcement

Similar "minor offenses with heavy penalties" have been repeatedly reported and controversial, due to the small amount of money involved and the astonishing number of fines received. Moreover, the punishment seems to comply with legal regulations but does not conform to social awareness.

In August 2022, the 16th inspection team of the 9th State Council inspection in Shaanxi discovered that there were "excessive and improper" administrative penalties imposed by local market supervision departments on small and micro market entities. A supermarket in the High tech Zone of Yulin City was fined 20000 yuan after selling 4 expired and 4-day yogurt returns; A certain pancake shop purchased a bottle of mustard oil, but upon inspection, it was found that the mustard oil did not indicate the production date. The illegal gains were determined to be 1.6 yuan and a fine of 5000 yuan was imposed.

Coincidentally, in August 2022, a vegetable store in Daqing, Heilongjiang Province, adjusted the price of potatoes from 1.2 yuan per kilogram to 2 yuan per kilogram without increasing costs. It was found to have violated the Price Law and was suspected of raising prices, and was fined 300000 yuan.

Several lawyers have stated that the direct reason for the repeated prohibition of "minor offenses and heavy punishments" is mechanical law enforcement, which ignores the general provisions of the Administrative Penalty Law, the amount of punishment does not conform to the simple understanding of the public, and is not conducive to gaining the support of the majority of people for law enforcement.

"The deeper reason is that some law enforcement agencies have not created a good working environment for grassroots law enforcement personnel, and do not punish law enforcement personnel who exercise a certain degree of discretion, often repeatedly questioning and questioning. As a result, the safest practice for law enforcement personnel is to 'close their eyes' punishment based on the so-called quantitative standards. This working environment in turn also harms law enforcement targets," said Lu Yijie, a lawyer at Beijing Zhongwen Law Firm.

Regarding the "minor offenses and heavy punishments" in the field of food safety, lawyer Huang Zhouxiong from Fujian Jiahejia Law Firm stated that to solve the problem from the root, it is necessary to improve the clear provisions of relevant laws, so that law enforcement officers can "have laws to follow" and "have laws to follow", without leaving room for vague operations. It is necessary for relevant laws to further refine provisions on punishment standards, leniency, mitigation, and non administrative penalties, in order to avoid excessive flexibility in discretion.

Zhongxin Jingwei Comprehensive Top News, Xigong Court, and Pengpai News