November 12, 1998 (September 24) Tiger years, Joan source stock case the end of the trial.

1998 11 12, China's first case of listed companies providing false financial and accounting reports of the First Trial outcome. Beijing First Intermediate People's Court has publicly pronounced: the Hainan China source of modern Agricultural Development Co., Ltd., Beijing people source Mansion Chairman, Beijing Cage Communications Corporation chairman Joan source case MA Yu and found guilty of providing false financial and accounting reports the crime, was the first trial and sentenced to three years imprisonment. Original Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region to the Beihai City CPA retired cadre, Hainan China Modern Agricultural Development Corporation the accounting classes Wen Shao Yinti employed for false financial and accounting reports the crime, was sentenced to two years imprisonment, suspended for two years.
court held that Joan source tree the illusion of good operating results, reach the issue of convertible bonds and restore original purpose operating loss of the respective companies, in violation of state to shareholders about the company's management system and relevant administrative regulations, increase in false profits and imaginary, Capital Provident Fund and the general public to provide financial and accounting reports, misleading investors and causing Joan source stock trading suspension since the consequences, and serious damage to the interests of shareholders and the stock held by investors. Defendant Ma Yu and, as chairman, instigation the affiliated staff imaginary compiled financial accounting reports, Department directly responsible person in charge; the defendant classes Wen Shao-As finance staff employed by the company, involved in the preparation of false financial and accounting reports directly responsible personnel, both the defendant's behavior constituted a crime of providing false financial and accounting reports, the circumstances of the crime is serious and should be severely punished according to law. The court held that the defendant Ma Yu and his defenders MA Yu and without false accounting reports subjective intention and objective behavior, should declare their innocence and defend opinions; the defendant classes Wen Shao-and his defenders classes Wen Shao-free the subjective intent of the crime and to accept the excuse and defend opinions incite crime, malicious collusion with others, a lack of factual and legal basis, the court shall not be accepted. Accordingly, the court based on the fact that defendant Ma Yu and classes Wen Shao crime, the nature of the crime, the circumstances are, and for society harmful levels, in accordance with Article 12 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China "the first paragraph of Article 25 a, Article 31, Article 72, paragraph 1 and the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress' decision on punishing the crime of violation of the Companies Act and the relevant provisions of Article IV above verdict.