Corrupt Chinese supermarket exec jailed
In this article (4)
The former chairman of China’s Bright Food Group has been found guilty of embezzling US$31 million between 2000 and 2006 when he was chairman of Shanghai Lianhua Supermarket Holdings Ltd.
Corrupt Chinese businessman Wang Zongnan was sentenced by the People’s Court in Shanghai on Tuesday to 18 years in prison for embezzlement and accepting bribes.
According to the court hearing, Zongnan had accepted 2.69 million yuan in bribes, hiding the money through the purchase of two villas.
In 2003, Wang’s parents bought two villas in Shanghai for 2.08 million yuan, 2.69 million yuan below the market price. The sellers were associated to a subsidiary of a company that had owed Wang a favor, according to the verdict. Wang sold the two villas in 2010 and 2013 for 14.8 million yuan in total.
In the ruling, the court ordered that 1 million yuan of Wang’s personal property be confiscated and more than 12 million yuan in bribes and illegal earnings be returned.
Questions & Answers
Q.What specific charges led to Wang Zongnan's prison sentence?
What specific charges led to Wang Zongnan's prison sentence?
Wang Zongnan was sentenced for embezzlement and for accepting bribes. The court found he had embezzled US$31 million and accepted 2.69 million yuan in bribes, which he concealed through property dealings.
Q.How did Wang Zongnan use the two villas to hide his illicit gains?
How did Wang Zongnan use the two villas to hide his illicit gains?
Wang's parents bought two villas in 2003 significantly below market price from sellers linked to a company owing him a favour. He later sold these villas for a total of 14.8 million yuan, concealing the initial bribe money.
Q.What financial penalties were imposed on Wang Zongnan by the court?
What financial penalties were imposed on Wang Zongnan by the court?
The court ordered the confiscation of 1 million yuan of Wang's personal property. Also, more than 12 million yuan in bribes and illegal earnings were ordered to be returned as part of the ruling.
Reader pulse
What does this verdict signify for Chinese retail?
Be the first to vote