Typical cases released by the Supreme People’s Court: 
     


     
 If the party subject to enforcement transfers compensation funds to which they are entitled into the accounts of close relatives in order to evade compulsory enforcement, criminal liability shall be pursued in accordance with the law for the crime of refusing to enforce judgments or rulings. 
     
 — Case of Hong Moujin’s refusal to enforce a judgment or ruling 
     


     
 [Basic Facts of the Case] 
     
 After the People’s Court ordered Hong Moujin to repay Zheng Mouzhang a loan of RMB 500,000, Hong failed to fulfill his repayment obligation. In March 2016, Zheng Mouzhang applied for compulsory enforcement. During the initial enforcement proceedings, the enforcing court, after conducting interviews, asset investigations, and online inquiries, was only able to freeze over RMB 20,000 in Hong Moujin’s bank account. The court further ascertained that Hong Moujin and his wife had entered into a divorce agreement in October 2003, under which a jointly owned house was assigned to the wife, while a farm and its associated equipment located in a certain town were awarded to Hong Moujin. Given the difficulty of enforcing against the farm, Zheng Mouzhang agreed to terminate this enforcement proceeding upon receipt of the aforementioned RMB 20,000, and the enforcing court simultaneously placed Hong Moujin on the list of discredited persons.  In November 2022, the premises of Hong Moujin’s farm were expropriated, yielding compensation exceeding RMB 1.4 million. Hong Moujin requested that these funds be remitted to the bank account of his daughter, Hong Mouyuan. Upon learning of this, Zheng Mouzhang petitioned for the resumption of enforcement. Hong Moujin was lawfully summoned to appear before the court, where he stated that his daughter had already used the demolition compensation to settle other debts and that he himself had no funds available for repayment. On the same day, the enforcing court issued a decision to detain Hong Moujin for 15 days. After the detention period expired, Hong Moujin deliberately went into hiding to evade enforcement, demonstrating an ability to perform yet refusing to comply with the obligations set forth in the final judgment, thereby rendering the court’s effective judgment unenforceable. His conduct is suspected of constituting the crime of refusing to enforce a judgment or ruling; accordingly, the enforcing court referred the case to the public security authorities for investigation.  During the investigative phase, Hong Moujin voluntarily reached a settlement agreement with Zheng Mouzhang and repaid part of the debt, whereupon Zheng Mouzhang voluntarily issued a letter of criminal forgiveness. The procuratorial organ subsequently brought charges against Hong Moujin for the crime of refusing to enforce a judgment or ruling. 
     


     
 [Judgment Result] 
     
 The trial court held that, after receiving the notice of enforcement and the order to submit a property report, the judgment debtor, Hong Moujin, particularly when his assets had changed and he was capable of settling the debt,  Instead of promptly reporting as required by law, the defendant deliberately concealed and transferred assets to evade enforcement, directly remitting the expropriation compensation to his daughter’s bank account in an attempt to circumvent execution. Such conduct constitutes an act of evading debt and should be deemed as a refusal to perform despite having the ability to do so, with serious circumstances, thereby constituting the crime of refusing to enforce judgments or rulings.  In view of the fact that Hong Moujin voluntarily reached a settlement agreement with Zheng Mouchang and repaid part of the debt, thereby demonstrating voluntary confession and accepting guilt and punishment, and having obtained the victim’s forgiveness, a lighter sentence may be imposed at the court’s discretion. Accordingly, it is hereby ruled: Hong Moujin is found guilty of the crime of refusing to enforce judgments or rulings and is sentenced to ten months’ imprisonment, suspended for a period of one year and six months. 
     


     
 [Typical Significance] 
     
 In enforcement proceedings, concealing or transferring assets to evade execution is a common tactic for evading debt, which further complicates the people’s courts’ efforts to locate debtors and seize assets. Such conduct not only infringes upon creditors’ rights but also disrupts market order and undermines judicial authority; it must be severely punished.  In this case, Hong Moujin, fully aware that the debt had not been discharged, nevertheless transferred a substantial portion of his personal share of the expropriation compensation to his daughter’s account, deliberately creating obstacles to enforcement and thereby infringing upon the rights and interests of the creditor, Zheng Mouchang. As a result, he was held criminally liable in accordance with the law, which serves as a deterrent to debtors to faithfully perform their obligations as determined by an effective judgment.  By concealing or transferring assets to evade enforcement, debtors not only fail to escape their obligations but also incur criminal liability. People’s courts refer any suspected criminal leads uncovered during enforcement proceedings to public security organs for investigation, thereby cracking down on debt‑evasion and default‑avoidance practices in accordance with the law. This strengthens and tightens the rule‑of‑law safeguards that ensure debtors “dare not flee, cannot flee, and are unwilling to flee,” thus upholding judicial credibility and protecting creditors’ rights while injecting a rule‑of‑law impetus into the building of an honest and trustworthy society.