论文部分内容阅读
为了炒股获利,江苏省苏州市的焦凤英(化名)投入了200万元资金,委托当地的“炒股能人”唐士明(化名)代为买卖股票。结果钱没赚到,147万元巨款却被唐士明擅自取走。谁该对焦凤英的巨额损失承担责任?此时的唐士明因为借用多人资金炒股造成大量资金流失而负债累累,仅在苏州市金阊区人民法院就已当了4次被告,累计被判赔偿近百万元,显然无力再赔偿焦凤英的损失。所以,银行和证券公司是否有责任、有多大责任就成了本案的关键。孤注一掷的焦凤英把唐士明、两家付款银行和证券公司及其营业部全部推上了法庭。2007年10月12日,苏州市中级法人民院对这件财产损害赔偿纠纷案作出终审判决,唐士明赔偿焦凤英147万元,其无力赔偿或赔偿不足的部分,由银行和证券公司共同承担90%的补充赔偿责任,焦凤英本人自负10%的责任。有望追回大部分损失的焦凤英一颗悬着的心终于放下了,而当了“替罪羊”的银行和证券公司却怎么也高兴不起来。他们都在深思:为什么会惹祸上身?到底在哪个环节出了问题?
In order to profiteering stocks, Jiao Fengying (not his real name) in Suzhou City, Jiangsu Province invested 200 million yuan in funds, commissioned the local “stock speculators ” Tang Shiming (not his real name) on behalf of the sale of stocks. The results did not make money, 1.47 million yuan huge amount was taken away by Tang Shiming. At this point, Tang Shiming was heavily indebted because of borrowing funds from a large number of investors and caused a large amount of capital loss. He was sentenced to 4 defendants only in the People’s Court of Jinli District, Suzhou City, accumulating total compensation Nearly one million yuan, obviously unable to compensate Jiao Fengying loss. Therefore, banks and securities companies have a responsibility, how much responsibility has become the key to the case. Desperate Jiao Fengying to Tang Shiming, two payment banks and securities companies and their sales department all put on the court. On October 12, 2007, Intermediate People’s Court of Suzhou City made a final judgment on this property damage compensation dispute case. Tang Shiming paid Jiao Fengying $ 1.47 million. The inability of the Company to compensate or indemnify the bank and the securities company jointly bear 90% Of the additional compensation liability, Jiao Fengying own responsibility of 10%. Jiao Fengying, who is expected to recover most of the losses, finally laid down his heart, and banks and securities companies that became “scapegoats” were not happy either. They are pondering: Why do you get in trouble? In the end in which part of a problem?