Today, the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate jointly issued a judicial interpretation on handling criminal cases of refusal to execute judgments and rulings, severely cracking down on criminal acts of refusal to execute, effectively safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of winning parties, and maintaining judicial authority and credibility. The judicial interpretation shall come into effect on December 1st. Article 313 of the Criminal Law of our country stipulates the crime of refusing to execute a judgment or ruling. If a person has the ability to execute a judgment or ruling of a people's court but refuses to execute it, and the circumstances are serious, he shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years, detention, or a fine; If the circumstances are particularly serious, the offender shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than seven years and shall also be fined. The judicial interpretation clearly stipulates five cases of "particularly serious circumstances" for the crime of refusing to execute. The "particularly serious circumstances" mainly include: obstructing execution through false litigation, false arbitration, false notarization, etc., resulting in the inability to execute judgments and rulings; Gathering crowds to attack the execution site, causing the execution work to be unable to proceed; Using violent methods such as siege, detention, and beating to physically attack the executing personnel, resulting in the inability to carry out the execution work; Refusing to execute, resulting in the applicant committing suicide, self harm, or causing other serious consequences; And other situations with particularly serious circumstances. The judicial interpretation further lists ten situations of "serious circumstances" for the crime of refusing to execute, mainly including refusing to deliver the property, tickets or certificates specified in the legal document after taking compulsory measures such as fines and detention, or refusing to move out of the house or land, resulting in the inability to execute the judgment or ruling; Falsifying, destroying, or concealing important evidence related to the ability to perform, using violence, threats, or bribery methods to prevent others from testifying, or instructing, bribing, or coercing others to give false testimony, obstructing the people's court from investigating the property situation of those who are obligated to execute, resulting in the inability to execute judgments or rulings; Obstructing the execution personnel from entering the execution site through intimidation, verbal abuse, crowd disturbance, threats, etc., resulting in the inability to carry out the execution work, and the circumstances are heinous; wait. Hiding or transferring property before the judgment or ruling takes effect can constitute the crime of refusal to execute. Some executed persons who have money but do not return it or transfer property use various means to evade execution. In previous judicial practice, the crime of refusing to execute a judgment or ruling generally targeted those who concealed or transferred property after the judgment or ruling became effective. This judicial interpretation clarifies that concealing or transferring property before the judgment or ruling became effective can constitute the crime of refusing to execute a judgment or ruling. Regulation: If a person, in order to evade their obligation to execute, conceals or transfers property after the start of the lawsuit or before the judgment takes effect, and after verification of the truth after the judgment or ruling takes effect, refuses to execute despite being required to do so, it can be determined that they have the ability to execute but refuse to execute. If the circumstances are serious, they will be held criminally responsible for the crime of refusing to execute the judgment or ruling. Can outsiders who help conceal or transfer property be held criminally responsible for joint crimes? Can outsiders who help conceal or transfer property be held criminally responsible for joint crimes? The judicial interpretation has been clarified. Regulation: If a third party knowingly refuses to execute a judgment or ruling of a people's court despite knowing that the person with the obligation to execute has the ability to do so, and colludes with them to assist in hiding or transferring property, resulting in the inability to execute the judgment or ruling, they shall be punished as accomplices of the crime of refusing to execute the judgment or ruling. The judicial interpretation clarifies the aggravating and mitigating circumstances of the crime of refusing to execute. Regarding aggravating circumstances, it is stipulated that those who refuse to comply with judgments or rulings on payment of alimony, support, child support, pension, medical expenses, labor remuneration, etc., which constitute a crime, shall be punished severely in accordance with the law. Regarding mitigating circumstances, it is stipulated that before initiating a public prosecution, all or part of the execution obligations must be fulfilled. If the criminal circumstances are minor, prosecution may not be carried out in accordance with the law; Those who fulfill all or part of their execution obligations before the first instance judgment is announced, and whose criminal circumstances are minor, may be given a lighter or exempted punishment in accordance with the law. The judicial interpretation on the clear procedure for recovering stolen assets and losses for the crime of refusal to execute also specifies the procedure for recovering stolen assets and losses. It stipulates that when the defendant is prosecuted for the crime of refusal to execute a judgment or ruling, any property that is intentionally damaged, disposed of without compensation, disposed of at an obviously unreasonable price, or falsely transferred, shall be recovered or ordered to be returned for compensation in accordance with the law, and shall be handed over to the executing court for disposal in accordance with the law. The People's Procuratorate shall review the involved property based on the investigation and transfer situation, and provide clear handling opinions on the involved property when initiating public prosecution. The people's court shall make a judgment in accordance with the law and handle the property involved in the case. (New Society)