Recently, the Haidian District People's Court of Beijing concluded a loan dispute case and determined that there is a difference in nature between WeChat red envelopes and transfers. Red envelopes are gifts, while transfers are loans. Accordingly, the court ordered the defendant Mr. Zhou to repay the plaintiff Ms. Liu's loan of 12,900 yuan. Topics related to
attracted attention and topped the list of hot searches!
According to reports, Ms. Liu complained that she met Mr. Zhou through WeChat in 2019. Soon after the two parties got to know each other, Mr. Zhou borrowed money from him many times on the grounds of financial difficulties. From 2020 to 2021, Ms. Liu transferred a total of 15,669 yuan to Mr. Zhou through bank transfers, WeChat red envelopes, etc., but repeated requests to no avail. In this regard, Mr. Zhou argued that the money involved was not a loan but a gift.
The court held after hearing:
Ms. Liu provided funds to Mr. Zhou through WeChat red envelopes and WeChat transfers. The WeChat red envelopes themselves contain the meaning of "gift". Based on the specific circumstances of this case, Ms. Liu provided funds to Mr. Zhou for his life support. The WeChat red envelopes sent to her totaled 2,769 yuan, which was a gift from Ms. Liu and did not need to be repaid by Mr. Zhou.
Regarding the 12,900 yuan paid by Ms. Liu to Mr. Zhou through WeChat transfer, although Mr. Zhou argued that it was a gift, he had no evidence to prove that Ms. Liu had expressed intention to make a gift in this regard, and considering that Mr. Zhou had borrowed money from Ms. Liu to repay In situations such as loans, Ms. Liu's transfer payment to Mr. Zhou through WeChat should be deemed to be a loan provided by her to Mr. Zhou, and Mr. Zhou should repay it.
Accordingly, the court made the above judgment.
The judge said:
"Although WeChat transfers and WeChat red envelopes are both paid through WeChat software, the nature of the two payments should be distinguished based on the different functions and attributes of WeChat software." The judge reminded after the court that WeChat software As a social tool, in addition to daily communication functions, it also has social functions. WeChat red envelopes are a typical embodiment of the social functions of WeChat software. The upper limit of the amount of WeChat red envelopes is 200 yuan, and they are called "red envelopes". According to my country's folk customs, paying "red envelopes" usually means a voluntary gift without the need to return it.
WeChat transfer is different from red envelopes and does not have the meaning of "gift". It is only a payment function set up by WeChat software and is one of the commonly used payment methods between social entities. In this case, the plaintiff claimed to establish a private lending relationship through WeChat transfer. If the defendant claimed that the nature of the money was a gift, it needed to submit corresponding evidence, otherwise it would bear the adverse consequences of being unable to provide evidence.
After seeing this case
many netizens said:
"Finally I know why the red envelope is only 200 yuan."
Some people are also concerned about
What should I do if the transfer amount is "1314" or "520"?
Previously, the court has heard similar cases
Under certain circumstances
Transfers of some special amounts are also counted as gifts
For example, "1314" and "520" during love
Mr. Li and Ms. Yang in Nanjing have been in love for less than a year. After breaking up, Mr. Li asked Ms. Yang to return more than 230,000 yuan in transfers made during the relationship, including special amounts such as 520 yuan and 1,314 yuan. After being refused, he sued the court.
After hearing the case, the court held that giving gifts or spending money to each other to express love during the relationship was a voluntary civil legal act and was a gift rather than a betrothal gift. Considering Mr. Li's income level, the gift did not far exceed his financial resources. Affordability. Moreover, Mr. Li’s claim that Ms. Yang maliciously demanded money lacked factual basis, and the final judgment dismissed the lawsuit.
In similar cases, the judge said that whether the parties are lovers or friends, when dealing with money, they should first accurately define the nature of the money. Although sometimes there may be some expressions of love between men and women, such as some special transfer amounts, such as the often mentioned 520 and 1314, some transfers that express love are often considered gifts. However, if both parties have clearly expressed their intention to borrow money, saying that they are in urgent need of money or need your help, this means that they intend to borrow money, and it is possible to establish a loan-lending relationship.
In addition, if it is a large gift based on marriage, such as car purchase money, house purchase money, etc., and the purpose of the marriage between the two parties has not been achieved, the giving party can request return.The "large amount" standard should be determined comprehensively by taking into account the economic capabilities of both parties and local consumption levels.
The judge reminded that, whether it is between ordinary friends or lovers, for large sums of money, both parties should try their best to clarify the nature of the money through various forms to avoid unnecessary disputes in the future.
China Youth Daily (id: zqbcyol Organized by: Zhang Xiaosong) Source: Rule of Law Daily, Litchi News, CCTV News, netizen comments, etc.
(Source: China Youth Daily WeChat official account)
