Hotels and netizens

Liu, a 29-year-old man, works on the Internet and likes surfing the Internet. After Liu met online, he became a WeChat friend in private. Later, Liu Bang booked a ticket and took the high-speed train from Hunan to Shaoguan to meet Liu. When they had sex in the hotel, they were caught by the police on the spot.

After Liu was seized by the police, she argued that she was not a prostitute on the grounds that there was no agreement and no money transaction, but the police did not adopt Liu's reasons. Subsequently, the police made an administrative penalty decision on Liu's detention 15 and a fine of 5,000 yuan. After the incident, Liu refused. After the administrative reconsideration failed, Chen Mou appealed to the court and asked the court to cancel the punishment decision.

In administrative proceedings, the punishment unit bears the burden of proof for the legality of administrative acts, and shall provide evidence and normative documents on which administrative acts are based. In other words, the punishment unit in this case needs to have enough evidence to prove that Liu's prostitution is legal.

In court, the punishment unit provided the following evidence and legal basis:

1. When the police arrested Liu, Liu was having sex with him and they were not in love. The above shows that Liu has illegal facts.

2. According to their chat records, they agreed to meet Liu who is brushing gifts in the live broadcast room. At this point, the two have reached a consensus on prostitution. Liu spends money to brush gifts, which is actually a way of whoring.

The police believe that according to the judicial interpretation, if the perpetrator achieves the purpose of prostitution, pays the money and starts to implement it, he should be punished according to law.

Article 66 of the Law on Public Security Administration Punishment stipulates that those who engage in prostitution or whoring shall be detained on 10- 15 days and may be fined up to 5,000 yuan; If the circumstances are minor, they shall be detained for less than 5 days, or fined for less than 500 yuan.

From this point of view, there seems to be no problem with the punishment decision of Liu by the punishment unit. Liu He is not in a relationship, but they also paid money (brush gifts). Isn't this whoring? However, before the court makes a judgment, it will not only listen to one side's defense. Then Liu defended himself:

First, I didn't talk to Chen Mou about prostitution and gift-brushing, just to get Chen Mou to promise to meet me. Their relationship is not whoring. Second, they didn't pay Chen Mou any extra money before they had sex. Third, the relationship between the two is a relationship between men and women, which is not illegal.

What is the court's decision? Judging from Liu's defense, the biggest problem in this case is that Liu brushed the gift just to meet, that is, there was no agreed price and no agreed prostitution. According to Article 54 of the Administrative Procedure Law, if the facts of the administrative punishment decision are unclear and the main evidence is insufficient, the court shall rule to revoke the punishment decision according to law.

In the end, the court held that the defendant's decision on punishment against Liu was unclear and the evidence was insufficient. Decided to revoke the defendant's decision to punish Liu. 50 yuan, the case acceptance fee, shall be borne by the defendant.