Although the company was registered in my name in Tianjin in February 2024, I can confirm that I have not registered the company and have not lost any relevant documents. Prior to this, I had never been to Tianjin, "said the person involved, Mr. Yu. At that time, it was learned from the registration information that this company underwent real name authentication during registration, and the registered personnel were informed... "said the representative of the Beichen District Market Supervision Administration in Tianjin. There is a gap of 5 days between the two background photos of Mr. Yu, but the clothes and wrinkles are completely identical; The background photos of Mr. Yu are inconsistent with his daily life photos... After comparing the above photos, it was found that there is a serious suspicion of AI face swapping The prosecutor said. This is a scene that a reporter from the Rule of Law Daily recently saw when he walked into the prosecutor's hearing room of the Beichen District People's Procuratorate in Tianjin. At this time, the hearing for the administrative prosecutor's supervision case of Yu's application to revoke the company registration is underway. At 9:00 am that day, the prosecutor, clerk, people's supervisor, hearing officer, and representative of the market supervision department involved in the case entered the hearing room. As the party involved, Mr. Yu, was far away in Guangdong, the public hearing was conducted via video link. The reporter noticed that the public hearing had a bit of a trial flavor - after verifying the identity information and announcing the discipline of the venue, the hearing host and the director of the Fifth Prosecution Department of Beichen District Procuratorate, Wang Zan, announced the start of the hearing, and the secretary informed the hearing rights and obligations. After Wang Zan asked whether to apply for the recusal of the hearing moderator, secretary, case participants, hearing officers, and other personnel, both parties stated that they would not apply. After investigation and verification by the procuratorate, it was found that on April 25, 2024, when Yu paid personal income tax, he was falsely registered as the legal representative, shareholder, and financial manager of a certain trading company in Tianjin. After verification, it was found that a trading company in Tianjin applied for company registration on a certain app. The market supervision department approved the company registration in February 2024, and Yu was registered as a shareholder of the company, with a subscribed capital of 2 million yuan and a 100% shareholding ratio. He also served as the legal representative. Yu applied to the Market Supervision Bureau of Beichen District to cancel the company registration but was unsuccessful. He also filed a lawsuit with the court on June 5, 2024, but did not achieve his goal. Afterwards, the case entered the prosecutorial supervision procedure of Beichen District Procuratorate. The Beichen District Procuratorate actively practiced the "Fengqiao Experience" of the new era and carried out dispute resolution on this case, which led to this hearing. I haven't registered, my documents haven't been lost, and I haven't even been to Tianjin before this Mr. Yu proposed to cancel the registration of this company. The representative of Beichen District Market Supervision Bureau introduced that they had received Mr. Yu before. At that time, they learned from the registration information that this company was registered through real name authentication, so the registration personnel should be informed. According to the "Opinions on the Handling of Identity Objections by Enterprise Parties Registered through Real Name Authentication", for those who have objections to their identity after registration through the real name authentication procedure, the revocation of the registration process for obtaining identity information through fraudulent means is not applicable. It is recommended to seek judicial means to resolve this issue. Subsequently, Wang Zan presented the evidence retrieved by the procuratorate in accordance with its authority, and both parties were cross examined. The first set of evidence includes photos of Yu's personal life, photos of Yu's facial recognition background saved in the app backend during the registration of a Tianjin trading limited company, and photos of some personnel similar to Yu who registered the company on the app. Wang Zan pointed out several suspicious points found after comparing these photos: there is a 5-day gap between Yu's two background photos, but the clothes and wrinkles are completely identical; Yu's background photos are inconsistent with his daily life photos. After requesting technical identification from the higher-level procuratorial organs, the response received was that the facial recognition photo of Yu retrieved from the App backend was not the person in question; Comparing the background photos of Yu with those of Zeng Bo and Zeng Jie, who were falsely registered in another case, it was found that the color and wrinkles of their clothes were exactly the same, their hairstyles were the same, and their faces were different. This comparison result significantly violates the common sense of life. The second set of evidence is the prosecutor's on-site visit to a registered address location photo of a certain trading company in Tianjin, which confirms that the address is false. The third set of evidence is the "two phone numbers of Mr. Yu" reserved during the registration of a certain trading company in Tianjin. When retrieving the owner information, it was found that the owners were Mr. Nie and Mr. Gao, and the two numbers were either overdue or out of service. Both parties have no objections to the evidence, and the hearing officer has also inquired. The presiding officer announces the recess, and the hearing enters the hearing officer's evaluation process. Afterwards, the representative of the hearing officer issued a hearing opinion: "In view of the investigation and verification process of the case by the procuratorial organ, the evidence display stage, the registered address and reserved mobile phone number of a certain trading company in Tianjin, as well as the false facial recognition photo of Mr. Yu, there are many doubts and AI face changing risks. Mr. Yu is likely to be registered under a false name. The Market Supervision Bureau needs to continue to investigate. If there is really a situation of false name registration, it should be revoked." "" The act of false name registration has had a serious impact on my work and life. I also know that the market supervision department has fulfilled its review responsibilities, but I still want to solve the problem effectively and cancel the company under my name, "said Mr. Yu. After we return, we will report the content of the hearing to our leaders, carefully investigate and study relevant laws and regulations, seek approval from higher-level units, and make legal decisions The representative of Beichen District Market Supervision Bureau said. The hearing ended smoothly in just one hour. After the meeting, Wang Zan told reporters, "Today's hearing is not only to determine the facts of the case, but more importantly, to provide a platform to facilitate the resolution of administrative disputes. It can not only reduce the burden of administrative litigation, but also help the appellant solve the legal risks and business difficulties faced by false registration. A few days later, in accordance with the consensus reached at this prosecutorial hearing, the administrative authorities initiated relevant investigation procedures to revoke the company's registration in accordance with the law. (New Society)