The various chaos in prepaid consumption is a violation of the rule of law and the principles of honesty and trustworthiness in the market. The intervention of judicial power will inevitably increase the cost of unscrupulous merchants committing evil, greatly rectify chaos, and safeguard consumer rights. On June 6th, the Supreme People's Court issued the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Civil Disputes over Prepaid Consumption (Draft for Soliciting Opinions)" to solicit public opinions. It is stipulated that if a business operator engages in the following behaviors and a consumer requests the business operator to pay punitive damages, the people's court shall support them: misleading consumers to engage in prepaid consumption through false discounts, price reductions, price comparisons, and other means; After receiving the advance payment, terminate the operation, neither redeem the goods or provide services as agreed, nor maliciously evade consumer refund applications; Concealing the fact that the plan is terminated or unable to operate normally, and inducing consumers to pay advance payments. In reality, people are not unfamiliar with prepaid cards. From small to several hundred yuan haircut cards, car wash cards, and movie watching cards, to tens of thousands of yuan fitness cards and beauty cards, prepaid cards come in all shapes and sizes. The main purpose for consumers to choose prepaid cards is to enjoy discounts and other benefits by pre storing high value. Operators can recover funds as soon as possible, attract consumers, and reduce operating costs. However, the originally win-win situation has caused damage to consumer interests due to poor business operations or intentional fraud by merchants. If some merchants promise extravagantly when promoting prepaid cards, but consumers find that the threshold is too high after applying for prepaid cards, many products and services cannot use prepaid cards. Moreover, some unscrupulous merchants have closed their doors and fled, causing consumers to lose money. These chaotic phenomena undoubtedly trample on the laws of the rule of law society and the honest and trustworthy market. If such chaos is not regulated and perpetrators are punished, it will inevitably make people doubt the market order, make consumers fearful everywhere, and be afraid of falling into traps, which is not conducive to economic development. The intervention of judicial power will inevitably increase the cost of unscrupulous merchants committing evil, greatly rectify chaos, and safeguard consumer rights. The draft for soliciting opinions released by the Supreme People's Court mainly focuses on areas that are prone to disputes and disputes, such as standard terms, refunds, and fraudulent behavior, and consumers are easily "harvested", which can be said to be on the right track. If the behavior of misleading consumers to make prepaid purchases through false discounts or other means, terminating operations after receiving prepaid payments, not redeeming goods as agreed, and maliciously evading consumer requests for refunds is considered fraud, the operator will face a "refund one compensation three" compensation of no less than 500 yuan. This will greatly increase the cost for business owners to make money and run away, making them revere integrity and rules, and not always scheming consumers. In addition, according to the draft for soliciting opinions, if the operator of the leased mall premises engages in activities such as profiteering and running away, and the venue lessor cannot provide the operator's real name and contact information, consumers have the right to request the venue lessor to repay the remaining prepayment principal and interest. If the landlord of the venue knowingly fails to take necessary measures despite the operator's infringement, the consumer may demand that they and the operator bear joint and several liability for compensation. This imposes strict auditing obligations on large shopping malls, avoiding some operators from using the glamorous appearance of the mall to carry out prepaid consumption services and leaving consumers with nowhere to protect their rights after obtaining their cards. It is worth noting that in response to the hidden "professional store closures" in recent years, the draft for soliciting opinions has also made it difficult for them to escape responsibility. According to the draft for soliciting opinions, if an operator is unable to provide goods or services as agreed due to operational difficulties after receiving advance payment, they should promptly settle and refund, otherwise they should bear civil liability. If a third party helps a business operator evade debt, consumers have the right to request that the third party and the business operator assume joint and several liability. That is to say, if the operator intends to close the store due to poor management, they should clarify their debts and notify consumers to refund. If they leave without saying goodbye, run away quietly, or act as accomplices to the closure, they should all bear compensation responsibility. It can be said that the draft for soliciting opinions has filled almost all the "holes" in the prepaid consumption field in the market. If implemented, it will effectively curb chaos and prevent consumers from falling into the "holes". (Le Xin She) (Author Shi Hongju, Unit: People's Court of Nanzhao County, Henan Province)