After the violent beating in Tangshan, everyone was shocked. Min Xu case and violent assault case are different in nature, and things are getting more and more complicated. I believe that the truth will come to light as time goes by. In this case, Min Xu lent jade articles with a total value of more than 30 million yuan to more than 0 jade merchants in the industry 10 on the grounds of opening a new store. Unexpectedly, an accident occurred in the course of operation, which led to the break of the capital chain and huge economic losses for the merchants.
What happened.
Min Xu is a woman in Tangshan, Hebei. Due to the epidemic, the capital chain was broken. In desperation, she chose to mortgage the goods to the pawnshop and borrow money. The businessman was very angry, so she took Min Xu to court. Min Xu felt very innocent and claimed that she was violently urged by the businessman. After reporting the case, law enforcement officers ignored it. The case is confusing and is under further investigation. Most merchants said that they were completely unaware of the virtual mortgage of goods to pawn shops, and only hoped that the goods could be fully recovered now.
How should this matter be characterized?
After the incident, the merchant called Min Xu a liar, and Min Xu claimed that he was framed by the police, saying that the evidence was insufficient. The pawnshop kept silent all the time, without any statement. It is not difficult to see from this incident that Shang Jia is a complete victim. Residents mortgaged all the goods for their own self-interest and took risks themselves, but now they let innocent businesses pay for their mistakes, which has certain problems in itself. Therefore, in this case, Min Xu should bear the main responsibility for its wrong decision and compensate the merchants according to law.