On the Composition of the Crime of Rape and Innocent Defense
Author | Li Chenfei Supervising Attorney | Zhang Yonglin
1. Original text of the statute
Article 236 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China -- [Rape]
Whoever rapes a woman by means of violence, coercion, or other methods shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of no less than three years and no more than ten years.
Whoever engages in sexual intercourse with a female under the age of fourteen shall be treated as guilty of rape and punished more severely.
Rape of women or carnal knowledge of a young girl, where any of the following circumstances exists, shall be punished with imprisonment of no less than ten years.
Imprisonment, life imprisonment, or the death penalty:
(I) Cases of raping women or engaging in sexual intercourse with young girls where the circumstances are particularly egregious;
(II) Those who have raped multiple women or engaged in sexual intercourse with multiple young girls;
(III) Those who rape women or commit sodomy with young girls in public;
(IV) Cases involving the gang rape of two or more persons;
(V) Committing adultery with a girl under the age of ten or causing harm to the girl;
(VI) Causing the victim to suffer serious injury, death, or other severe consequences.
2. Interpretation of Legal Provisions
1. Protected legal interests:
The legally protected interest in this crime is women’s right to sexual autonomy. Sexual autonomy includes: (1) the right to decide whether or not to engage in sexual intercourse; and (2) the right to determine the specific conditions of sexual intercourse (such as the time, place, and partner).
2. Acting entity:
The direct perpetrator can only be male. However, women may be held liable as instigators, accomplices, indirect principal offenders (by inciting a person who lacks criminal responsibility to commit rape), or joint principal offenders (by engaging in acts of violence, oppression, or coercion, among others).
3. The act of execution:
The objective elements of the crime of rape consist of two parts: first, the use of violence, coercion, or other means with the intent to commit sexual intercourse; second, the act of sexual intercourse itself.
(1) Violent means refer to the use of physical coercion, such as beating or binding, to render a woman physically incapable of resisting.
(2) Coercive means, that is, the act of informing a woman of impending harm and, through intimidation or threats, inducing fear in her so that she is compelled to comply with sexual demands. The content of the coercion is not limited to threats of physical violence; it may also include threats to disclose private information or to damage one’s reputation. However, regardless of the method employed, the threat must be sufficient to cause the woman to fear resisting or to render her unable to resist.
(3) Other means refer to coercive methods, other than violence or duress, that are sufficient to render a woman unable or unwilling to resist; for example, engaging in sexual intercourse while she is intoxicated or asleep, or deceiving her into forming a mistaken belief, thereby preventing her from giving valid consent or causing her to “consent” based on a misapprehension of the facts. In such circumstances, even if no coercive measures are employed on the surface, as long as the woman’s will is substantially violated, it still constitutes the crime of rape.
4. Object of the action:
Raping a woman who has reached the age of fourteen constitutes ordinary rape.
Raping a girl under the age of fourteen constitutes the crime of carnal abuse of a minor (even if the minor consents, it still constitutes rape).
Raping a woman who is mentally incapacitated and lacks the capacity to consent constitutes the crime of rape, even if she appears to have consented, because such individuals lack both the capacity to understand and the capacity to give informed consent.
Intra-marital rape—when a husband forces his wife to have sexual intercourse against her will—also satisfies the elements of the crime of rape. However, whether the act constitutes rape primarily hinges on the issue of evidentiary proof.
5. Conditions for Aggravation of the Statutory Penalty:
(1) Rape women and underage girls in public places.
“Public place” refers to a place that is accessible to the general public or to an indefinite number of persons. “Publicly”: refers to the act of committing rape while knowing that it can be witnessed by a majority of people or an indefinite number of individuals. The term “crowd” does not require the presence of exactly three individuals; it primarily refers to the presence of an indeterminate number of persons, excluding accomplices.
(2) Gang rape involving two or more persons.
Rape by a group: Accountability applies to unlawful acts of rape committed two or more consecutive times. Where multiple persons conspire to commit gang rape, all such persons shall be deemed to have committed gang rape.
(3) Rape a young girl under the age of ten or cause harm to a young girl.
Sexual intercourse with a girl under the age of 14 shall be punished more severely in accordance with the law. When engaging in sexual intercourse with a female child under the age of ten, the enhanced statutory penalty shall be directly applied.
(4) Resulting in the victim sustaining serious injury, death, or other grave consequences.
Aggravated offense: It must be caused by the act of committing the crime of rape (the use of violence or sexual intercourse carried out with the intent to commit such an act). If casualties are caused by other acts (such as post‑crime murder or venting of anger), such acts shall be separately prosecuted and punished—e.g., as intentional homicide or intentional injury—and the perpetrator shall be subject to cumulative sentencing together with the charge of rape. “Other serious consequences” include the victim’s suicide, mental disorder, and pregnancy.
6. The issue of multiple offenses:
The crime of combining offenses is only stipulated in the offense of trafficking women and children. If, during the actual act of trafficking, the trafficked women or children are raped, the penalty for the trafficking offense is aggravated; if rape is committed as a separate offense in addition to trafficking, multiple counts shall be punished cumulatively.
3. Standards for Filing a Case and Sentencing
Sentencing Level | Plot | Sentencing Standard |
The One gear | Whoever rapes a woman by means of violence, coercion, or other methods | shall be punished with a fixed-term imprisonment of no less than three years and no more than ten years. |
The Two gear | Whoever engages in sexual intercourse with a girl under the age of fourteen shall be treated as guilty of rape. | A term of imprisonment of no less than three years but no more than ten years shall be imposed, with a heavier penalty. |
The Three gear | 1. Cases of rape of women or carnal knowledge of young girls that are particularly egregious; 2. Those who have raped multiple women or engaged in sexual intercourse with multiple young girls; 3. Those who rape women or engage in sexual intercourse with young girls in public; 4. When two or more persons jointly commit rape; 5. Engaging in sexual intercourse with a female child under the age of ten, or causing harm to such a child; 6. Causing the victim to suffer serious injury, death, or other grave consequences. | Shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of ten years or more, life imprisonment, or death. |
4. Arguments for a Not Innocent Defense
Defense Argument 1: The objective physical evidence is inconclusive, the chain of evidence has not been established as a coherent system, and the facts are unclear with insufficient evidence; therefore, the defendant cannot be found guilty.
Reference Case: (2019) Inner Mongolia 01 Criminal Final Judgment No. 88
Case Name: Second-Instance Criminal Judgment in the Case of Bai Lin for the Crime of Rape
Reviewing Court: Hohhot Intermediate People’s Court
Reasons for the Ruling:
The Court finds that, although the original judgment determined that the appellant, Bai Lin, acted against the victim’s will and used violence to forcibly engage in sexual intercourse with her, the existing evidence only establishes the presence of certain physical evidence at the crime scene—namely, sanitary napkins, a beverage bottle, and a pillowcase bearing traces attributable to Bai Lin. However, this evidence fails to establish when, by whom, or under what circumstances such traces were left at the scene. Moreover, Bai Lin has consistently denied committing the rape. The evidence presented by the original trial’s public prosecution authority does not corroborate one another, and the totality of the evidence does not meet the standards of being both conclusive and sufficient, thus precluding the sole conclusion that Bai Lin was the perpetrator.
The original judgment found the facts concerning Bai Lin’s conviction for rape to be unclear and the evidence insufficient; therefore, the charges brought by the original prosecuting authority cannot stand.
The appellant, Bai Lin, is found not guilty.
Second view on acquittal: Engaging in sexual intercourse with a woman without using violence, coercion, or other coercive means does not constitute the crime of rape.
Reference Case: (2017) Jin 04 Criminal Final Judgment No. 28
Case Name: Second-Instance Criminal Judgment in the Case of Defendant Feng Tao for the Crime of Rape
Reviewing Court: Intermediate People’s Court of Changzhi City, Shanxi Province
Reasons for the Ruling:
This court holds that the crime of rape refers to the act of having sexual intercourse with a woman by force, coercion, or other means, against her will. The appellant (the original defendant), Feng Tao, and Li Moumou (the original victim) both acknowledged the fact that they engaged in sexual intercourse. Both testified that no violence or coercion was used, nor were any other means employed to place Li Moumou in a state of inability to resist, unwillingness to resist, or unawareness of resistance. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the appellant, Feng Tao, took advantage of Li Moumou’s unawareness or inability to resist in order to commit rape.
Although Li stated that she expressed her unwillingness during the sexual encounter and that she cried and pushed the appellant, there is no other evidence to corroborate these claims. Therefore, when Feng Tao engaged in sexual intercourse with Li, he did not use violence, coercion, or any other such means. Whether Li’s will was violated also cannot be determined based on the aforementioned evidence.
Some of the appellant Feng Tao’s grounds for appeal are upheld. In summary, the evidence establishing that the appellant Feng Tao is guilty of rape is insufficient.
The appellant (the defendant in the original trial), Feng Tao, is found not guilty;
Third view on acquittal: The interrogation procedure contained significant defects, which the public security organ failed to explain. Following a motion to exclude illegally obtained evidence, such evidence may not be relied upon as the basis for the verdict.
Reference Case: (2016) Yunnan Criminal Final Judgment No. 262
Case Name: Second-Instance Criminal Judgment in the Case of Lu Rongxin for Intentional Homicide and Rape
Reviewing Court: Yunnan Provincial Higher People’s Court
Reasons for the Ruling:
The appellant, Lu Rongxin, made a total of eight statements during the investigation phase, with only his seventh statement being a confession of guilt, after which he retracted it. The original judgment found that Lu Rongxin’s guilty confession was corroborated by witness testimonies, the on-scene investigation records, expert opinions, and other evidence, and thus constituted the primary evidence for establishing his guilt. Upon investigation:
1. The evidence on file shows that the interrogation locations cited in the appellant Lu Rongxin’s guilty statements are inconsistent with each other. The interrogation warrant issued by the Mengla County Public Security Bureau and the record of the seventh interrogation indicate that the interrogation took place in the second interrogation room of the Mengla County Detention Center; however, the interrogation video shows that the actual location was not an interrogation room within the detention center, creating a clear contradiction between the two.
2. The evidence on file shows that the interrogation times for the appellant Lu Rongxin’s guilty statements are mutually contradictory. The interrogation notice issued by the Mengla County Public Security Bureau confirms that Lu Rongxin was interrogated from 10:00 PM on September 21, 2012, to 1:20 AM on September 22, 2012. The record of the seventh interrogation indicates that Lu Rongxin made a confession between 10:47 PM on September 21 and 1:08 AM on September 22, 2012. The interrogation video shows that the seventh interrogation took place from 10:00 PM on September 21 to 1:49 AM on September 22, 2012.
The aforementioned evidence contains obvious inconsistencies regarding the start and end times of the interrogation.
3. There are significant doubts regarding the interrogation video recording of the appellant Lu Rongxin’s guilty confession, and no reasonable explanation has been provided. In the interrogation video played in court, only Lu Rongxin’s back was visible, and there was no audio. Regarding the aforementioned issues, the Mengla County Public Security Bureau issued a statement on May 16, 2014, stating that the absence of audio in the footage was due to a malfunction of the audio pickup device. On November 5 of the same year, it issued another statement, explaining that the recording equipment had not been installed in a timely manner because the case-handling facilities were undergoing renovation.
The two statements are inconsistent with each other and contain obvious contradictions. Furthermore, the video footage shows that there was a camera positioned opposite Lu Rongxin, but no video recording from that camera exists. In this regard, the public security authorities have not provided any explanation.
In summary, there are significant defects in the location, time, and interrogation video recording of the appellant Lu Rongxin’s sole incriminating statement, and the public security authorities have failed to provide a reasonable explanation. The evidence-gathering procedure for Lu Rongxin’s guilty confession violated the relevant provisions of the “Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China” and the “Measures for the Implementation of the Regulations on Detention Houses of the People's Republic of China,” and therefore cannot be used as evidence for the final judgment.
The Court adopts the opinions of both the prosecution and the defense that Lu Rongxin’s guilty statements should be excluded.
This Court holds that the forensic opinion identifying the DNA of appellant Lu Rongxin on the handle of the hoe, Lu Rongxin’s guilty confession, the video recording of his on-site identification, and the corresponding identification record—upon which the original judgment was based—cannot serve as the basis for the conviction; furthermore, none of the other evidence on file establishes a connection between Lu Rongxin and the facts of the rape and murder of the victim Deng. During the second-instance proceedings, new evidence has emerged that does not rule out the possibility that another person committed the crime.
The original judgment found the facts of Lu Rongxin’s intentional homicide and rape to be unclear and the evidence insufficient; therefore, Lu Rongxin cannot be convicted, and the judgment is hereby revised in accordance with the law.
The appellant, Lu Rongxin, is found not guilty.
Fourth defense argument for acquittal: Taking the victim’s consent as the key point of defense—where sexual intercourse occurs with a woman without her consent being violated, the act should not be classified as rape.
Reference case: (2022) XZ 04 Crim. App. No. 7
Case Name: Criminal Second-Instance Judgment in the Case of Tang Mou for the Crime of Rape
Reviewing Court: Intermediate People’s Court of Nyingchi City, Tibet Autonomous Region
Reasons for the Ruling:
This court holds that, according to Article 236 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, the crime of rape refers to the act of having sexual intercourse with a woman by force, coercion, or other means, against her will. In this case, the appellant, Tang, and the victim, Yan, were formerly in a romantic relationship. Following their breakup, the two parties failed to reach an agreement on various personal matters, leading to ongoing disputes. Consequently, both parties’ accounts of the facts are subjective and lack corroborating evidence.
The body-worn camera footage in this case cannot prove that the appellant, Tang, had already begun to commit the crime but failed due to reasons beyond his control. The basic factual elements establishing the appellant Tang’s guilt of rape lack corroborating evidence. The testimonies of witnesses Chen, Du, and Wanda Zha, as well as the identification records and the body-worn camera video admitted by the court of first instance, only demonstrate that on September 5, the appellant Tang entered Room 304 of the temporary residence of the victim, which is also the Narcotics Control Intelligence Station of the Chayu County Public Security Bureau, and that the appellant Tang and the victim Yan were found in the room’s bathroom. This evidence is insufficient to prove that the appellant Tang used violence, coercion, or other means to prepare to have forcible sexual intercourse with the victim.
Therefore, the existing evidence fails to meet the standard of proof that the facts are clear and the evidence is true and sufficient. The People’s Procuratorate of Chayu County, Tibet Autonomous Region, alleged, and the original trial people’s court found, that Tang committed rape by using violence against the victim against her will, but was unsuccessful due to reasons beyond his control; however, the facts supporting this finding are unclear, and the evidence is insufficient.
The Court upholds the grounds for appeal and the defense arguments advanced by the appellant, Tang, and his defense counsel.
The appellant (the defendant in the original trial), Tang, is found not guilty.
Fifth defense argument in favor of acquittal: Where the victim had the opportunity to resist but did not do so, it should not be deemed as “against the woman’s will.”
Reference Case: (2019) Min 0725 Xing Chu No. 89
Case Name: Criminal Judgment on the Retrial of Li’s Case of Rape
Reviewing Court: Zhenghe County People’s Court, Fujian Province
Reasons for the Ruling:
Regarding the defense counsel’s and the defendant’s argument that the defendant did not use violence, threats, or other means to engage in sexual intercourse with the victim against the victim’s will.
Upon investigation, firstly, the incident occurred at the second-floor emergency exit of a KTV, which is a semi‑open, unenclosed space. At the time, individuals were passing through the third‑floor corridor, yet the victim neither called for help nor attempted to rush out into the corridor to seek assistance from others. Although the victim, Zhang, had consumed alcohol that evening, there is no evidence to confirm that she was intoxicated. Secondly, the two individuals remained in the corner between the second and third floors and at the second‑floor emergency exit for approximately 50 minutes. Prior to engaging in sexual intercourse, the defendant, Li, embraced, caressed, and kissed Zhang, and Zhang responded to these advances; although she occasionally expressed refusal, she did not mount any significant resistance, and afterward explicitly stated that the embraces, caresses, and kisses were acceptable. Thirdly, before the sexual encounter, the button on Zhang’s trousers came off; the defendant even picked up the button and placed it in Zhang’s pocket, and at that time, Zhang made no attempt to leave.
When the defendant inserted his genitals into the vagina of the victim Zhang Moumou in a back-to-back manner, Zhang Moumou did not refuse with words, did not beg for mercy, blame, and did not take other means such as calling for help to resist. The defense argues that a person’s body language reflects their inner state. Considering the physical dynamics involved, in the case of standing‑up intercourse, if the victim does not cooperate—whether by simply standing upright or by keeping their legs tightly closed—the act of sexual assault cannot be completed.
This court finds that the defense counsel’s argument on this point is consistent with the objective facts. Furthermore, after the incident, the victim stated that she did not engage in sexual intercourse with the defendant voluntarily. The prosecution argues that the victim’s statement should be taken as the basis for the final determination.
This court holds that the victim’s statement may serve as the basis for a final judgment only after it has been verified and found to be true. In determining whether the defendant’s conduct was contrary to the victim’s will, account shall be taken of the victim’s subjective mental state at the time the incident occurred. Based on the scene of the incident, the conduct and statements of the defendant and the victim at the time of the incident, as well as the sexual position involved, the evidence on file is insufficient to prove that the defendant, Li Moumou, used violence, threats, or other means to cause the victim to be unable to resist, unwilling to resist, or afraid to resist, thereby forcibly engaging in sexual intercourse with the victim.
Therefore, the defendant’s defense and the defense counsel’s arguments are accepted.
The Court finds that the evidence presented by the prosecution is insufficient to establish that the defendant, by means of violence, coercion, or other methods, caused the victim to be unable to resist, incapable of resisting, or unwilling to resist, thereby forcibly engaging in sexual intercourse against the victim’s will. The court adopts the defense arguments raised by the defendant and the defense counsel. The prosecution’s allegation that the defendant, Li, committed rape is not supported by sufficient evidence, and the charge cannot stand.
The defendant, Li [Last Name], is found not guilty.
Sixth ground for acquittal: The absence of evidence of violence precludes ruling out the possibility that the victim inflicted the injuries on themselves, and it cannot be established that the defendant’s violent actions rendered the victim incapable of resistance.
Reference case: (2019) Sichuan 0108 Criminal Initial Case No. 466
Case Name: First-Instance Criminal Judgment in the Case of Rape Committed by Yin and He Feng
Reviewing Court: Chenghua District People’s Court of Chengdu City
Reasons for the Ruling:
1. Regarding whether the defendant He Feng assaulted the victim Yin and caused head injuries to him.
To substantiate the prosecution’s allegation that the defendant, He Feng, violently assaulted the victim, Yin, causing head injuries to Yin, the prosecution presented the following evidence in court:
First, there is the statement of the victim, Ms. Yin, which mainly recounts that on the day of the incident, at noon, the defendant, He Feng, demanded to inspect her mobile phone, but she refused. He then pinned her down on the living room sofa, wrapped a bathrobe around her head, covered her mouth with his hand, forcibly seized her phone, and, upon seeing her chat with a male friend, began randomly striking her head. He subsequently led her into the bedroom, continued to beat her head, and forced her to perform oral sex. Thereafter, he continued to assault her head and face and forcibly engaged in sexual intercourse with her; during this time, she noticed that her head was bleeding.
Second, the statement and defense of the defendant, He Feng, mainly state that at around 4:00 p.m. that day, he discovered the victim, Yin, engaging in WeChat conversations with another man, which led to an argument. He then pulled Yin down onto the floor in the living room and later helped her into the bedroom. After Yin rushed out of the bedroom, she struck her head against a wooden partition in the living room, causing it to bleed. He then assisted her back into the bedroom and slapped her three times on the ears, reprimanding her for inflicting self-harm.
Third, the emergency medical records, the certificate of diagnosis, photographs taken by the victim, Ms. Yin, using her mobile phone, and the forensic assessment report—collectively indicate that at 8:50 p.m. on December 21, 2018, Ms. Yin presented to the hospital complaining of dizziness and headache following a head injury sustained one hour earlier. She was diagnosed with a laceration of the scalp, which was subsequently determined to constitute a minor injury. The mobile phone self‑portraits show that the top of her head had been bandaged, while no injuries were visible on her face.
With regard to the aforementioned evidence, the defendant He Feng and his defense counsel raised the following objections: First, the victim, Yin, sustained a scalp laceration, which could not have been caused by the defendant He Feng’s hand-to-hand assault; second, although Yin stated that He Feng randomly struck him on the head and face, no injuries were found on his face. Therefore, they contend that the existing evidence is insufficient to establish that the head injury sustained by Yin was caused by He Feng’s assault.
The Court finds that, first, the victim, Yin, sustained an injury to the top of the head, specifically a laceration of the scalp. Based on common experience, such an injury would generally be difficult to inflict through a bare-handed punch. Second, Mr. Yin stated that He Feng repeatedly struck him on the head and face; however, both the medical records and the photographs taken by Mr. Yin immediately after receiving treatment confirm that, apart from a single laceration on the top of his head, there were no other injuries to his head or face, indicating that Mr. Yin’s statement contains inaccuracies.
Third, among the evidence on file, apart from Mr. Yin’s statement, there is no other evidence to corroborate that the head injury sustained by Mr. Yin was caused by He Feng’s assault. Therefore, the existing evidence is insufficient to establish that He Feng assaulted Yin, causing head injuries; nor can it rule out the reasonable doubt that Yin may have sustained the head injuries by striking his own head against the wooden partition in the living room.
In summary, this Court holds that the crime of rape refers to the act of having sexual intercourse with a woman by force, coercion, or other means, in violation of her will. However, in this case, the evidence on record fails to establish that, when the defendant He Feng engaged in sexual intercourse with the victim Yin, He Feng used violence or coercion against Yin. Moreover, given that the two parties were already involved in a relationship that is not condoned by mainstream societal ethical norms, it is impossible to eliminate the reasonable doubt that Ms. Yin consented to the sexual intercourse with He Feng. Therefore, the prosecution’s evidence alleging that the defendant He Feng committed rape is insufficient, and the charged offense cannot be established.
With regard to the defense counsel’s argument that the evidence on record is insufficient to prove that the defendant, He Feng, committed rape, this Court accepts such defense opinion.
With regard to the plaintiff Yin’s claim for compensation arising from head injuries, as the evidence on file fails to establish that Yin was raped by the defendant He Feng, nor does it establish that the head injuries were caused by He Feng’s assault, this Court does not support such claim.
The defendant, He Feng, is found not guilty.
Viewpoint Seven on Acquittal: Where there are inconsistencies between the victim’s statement and the witness testimony, such evidence may not be relied upon as the basis for a conviction.
Reference case: (2018) Hebei 0322 Criminal Initial Case No. 324
Case Name: First-Instance Criminal Judgment in the Case of Zhu Jiu for the Crime of Rape
Reviewing Court: Changli County People’s Court, Hebei Province
Reasons for the Ruling:
The defendant, Zhu Jiu, and his defense counsel argued that the statements of the victim, Liu Moumou, and the testimony of witness Liu Mou, as presented by the prosecution, were inconsistent and lacked credibility, and that the records and photographs of the physical examination conducted by the public security authorities on Liu Moumou were irrelevant to the defendant, Zhu Jiu. The defendant, Zhu Jiu, and his defense counsel raised no objections to the other evidence.
Among the aforementioned evidence, the defendant Zhu Jiu’s statement that he returned to the Haitang Hotel after taking the victim to the rented room, as well as the victim Liu’s account that the defendant Zhu Jiu kissed her, had sexual intercourse with her, and slept together, are both deemed inadmissible by this Court due to insufficient objectivity; the remaining evidence meets the requirements of legality, objectivity, and relevance and is therefore admitted by this Court.
This court holds that criminal cases concern the imposition of criminal liability and are subject to a stringent standard of proof, requiring that the facts be clear, the evidence be sufficient, and all reasonable doubt be excluded. Upon verification, the only direct evidence supporting the prosecution’s allegation that the defendant Zhu Jiu committed rape is the statement of the victim, Liu Moumou; no other objective evidence corroborates this claim, and the defendant Zhu Jiu has consistently denied the charges.
The victim, Liu, has provided multiple inconsistent accounts of the events leading up to the incident, containing contradictions and lacking objectivity. The defendant Zhu Jiu’s initial statement regarding the location and specific details of his sexual encounter with the accused is clearly inconsistent with other evidence on file, and the motive behind such testimony is questionable. Her first and second statements indicate that she experienced vaginal bleeding during her sexual encounters with the defendant, Zhu Jiu; however, this is inconsistent with the diagnostic certificate issued by Changli County People’s Hospital, which notes upon physical examination that the victim, a young girl, had slight mucosal congestion at the 5 o’clock position of the vulva and vaginal opening, but no fresh lacerations were observed on the hymen.
In his second and fifth statements, he claimed to have used toilet paper to wipe himself after engaging in sexual intercourse; however, the investigative authorities failed to collect any relevant physical evidence. The comprehensive forensic institution did not detect any human semen components in the vaginal secretions of the victim from the submitted samples. Consequently, the evidence presented by the prosecution to support the charge that the defendant, Zhu Jiu, committed rape is inconsistent and fails to meet the criminal standard of proof requiring a single, conclusive conclusion.
The facts that the victim, Liu, had ecchymoses on the neck and above both breasts, as well as mild mucosal congestion at the 5 o’clock position of the vaginal orifice, objectively exist. However, the investigative authorities failed to collect relevant biological samples, and it remains unclear whether there was physical contact between the victim, Liu, and the defendant, Zhu, or the cause of the mild mucosal congestion at the 5 o’clock position of the vaginal orifice. Therefore, a determination favorable to the defendant, Zhu, should be made.
In summary, the evidence presented by the prosecution is insufficient, and the charges against the defendant Zhu Jiu cannot be sustained. The Court adopts the defense counsel’s and the defendant Zhu Jiu’s argument that the defendant Zhu Jiu is not guilty.
Zhu Jiu was found not guilty.
Judicial Viewpoint No. 8: The victim’s objectively cooperative conduct negates the element of “against the woman’s will.”
Reference Case: Ruijian Public Prosecution Non-Prosecution Decision [2021] Z47
Case Name: Suspected Rape Case Involving Yang [Last Name]
Reviewing Authority: Ruijin City People’s Procuratorate
Reasons for the Ruling:
The Ruijin Municipal Public Security Bureau, in its referral for review and prosecution, determined that on the evening of May 8, 2020, the person not prosecuted, Yang, went with friends to sing at a private karaoke room at *** KTV in Xianghu Town, Ruijin City. Huang, a hostess (with other hostesses also present), sat beside Yang and accompanied him in singing. In the early hours of the following day, as Huang exited the restroom inside the private room after using it, Yang pulled her into the restroom and, despite her resistance, engaged in sexual intercourse with her.
After review by this court and upon return for further investigation, this court still finds that the evidence presented by the Ruijin Municipal Public Security Bureau—namely, that Yang committed forcible sexual intercourse with Huang by means of violence, threats, or other coercive methods—is insufficient. With respect to the first incident, Yang initially stated that Huang was initially unwilling to engage in sexual activity but did not offer significant resistance; however, he later claimed that they had already agreed on a fee prior to the sexual encounter. As for Huang, she asserted that she sent a distress message via WeChat to a colleague before the alleged rape, yet both parties subsequently deleted their WeChat chat records. Moreover, it is evident that Huang could have sought assistance from others in the same private room, rendering her account implausible.
Furthermore, according to the evidence on file, Mr. Huang sustained no injuries and his clothing was not torn. Both Mr. Huang and the KTV staff demanded that Mr. Yang pay RMB 50,000 as compensation in order to settle the matter privately; therefore, the evidence supporting a finding of forcible sexual intercourse is insufficient. In accordance with Article 175, paragraph 4, of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, it has been decided not to prosecute Yang [Name].
Defense Argument No. 9: The victim’s testimony is internally inconsistent on key details, and its objectivity and credibility cannot be verified; moreover, the evidence in the case constitutes “single-evidence conviction,” which does not meet the standard of proof for conviction requiring that “the facts are clear and the evidence is conclusive.”
Reference case: (2018) Liaoning 14 Criminal Final Judgment No. 14
Case Name: Second-Instance Judgment in the Liu Yuwei Rape Case
Reviewing Court: Huludao Intermediate People’s Court, Liaoning Province
Reasons for the Ruling:
Upon review, it has been determined that the original judgment’s finding that the defendant Liu Yuwei committed the crime of rape is based on unclear facts and insufficient evidence. Sun’s statement contains inconsistencies in terms of timing and details, and its credibility and objectivity cannot be established. Although Liu Yuwei testified that Sun had visited his home to walk his dog, this is insufficient to establish the fact of rape. The content of the suicide note written by Sun should be regarded as part of Sun’s statement. The cases involving Li and Fan are unrelated to the present case and cannot corroborate the alleged rape committed by Liu Yuwei. Furthermore, the other evidence on file fails to support the victim’s testimony and does not meet the evidentiary standard required by criminal procedure, which demands that the facts be clear and the evidence be true and sufficient.
This court holds that the original trial’s finding that the defendant, Liu Yuwei, committed the crime of rape is based on unclear facts and insufficient evidence, and the charges cannot stand; accordingly, the judgment should be reversed and corrected in accordance with the law. The appellant and the defense counsel’s arguments on appeal and in their defense that the charge of rape cannot be sustained are hereby accepted in accordance with the law; the opinion of the Huludao Municipal People’s Procuratorate of Liaoning Province to uphold the original judgment is not supported by law.
The appellant, Liu Yuwei, is found not guilty.
Author
Introduction
Zhang Yonglin
Senior Partner at Zhiheng Xi’an, Deputy Secretary-General of the National Criminal Law Committee of Zhiheng
Master of Laws, member of the Criminal Procedure Committee of the Xi’an Lawyers Association, and selected for the Shaanxi Provincial Leading Talents Pool for International Lawyers.
Areas of ExpertiseCriminal law practice, corporate legal advisory services, construction project disputes, and more.
Attorney Zhang Yonglin possesses a solid theoretical foundation and extensive experience in handling criminal cases, having successfully secured release on bail pending trial, case dismissal, non‑arrest decisions, withdrawal of prosecution following a decision not to prosecute, suspended sentences, sentence reductions, and the full execution of actual prison terms in numerous criminal matters.
Since beginning practice, the attorney has handled numerous complex criminal cases, including successfully arguing a charge of intentional homicide as one of intentional injury, securing the complete dismissal of all charges in cases involving contract fraud, bribery of non-state personnel, and fraud. The attorney has also handled cases involving the production and sale of counterfeit alcohol, illegal lending, embezzlement and bribery, misappropriation of funds, aiding and abetting/covering up crimes, fraud, rape, and indecent assault.
Successfully secured for the client mitigating circumstances such as voluntary surrender, meritorious service, and accomplice status, resulting in acquittals in multiple cases and achieving effective defense.
Li Chenfei
Yunnan Police College, Major in Law
Specializes in criminal defense, labor disputes, and contract disputes. Strong communication skills; previously worked at the Xi’an Branch of Bank of Beijing, with expertise in contract review and risk management compliance, and practical experience in finance, credit, and corporate financing.
Possessing both a strong foundation in legal theory and a practical, investigative mindset, I developed a solid awareness of evidence, procedural principles, and investigative logic during my studies at a public security college. In handling cases, I place particular emphasis on practical investigation, the integrity of the chain of evidence, and compliance with legal procedures.
Actively participated in the handling of criminal, civil, and commercial cases, including the organization of evidentiary materials, the drafting of legal documents, and the development of defense strategies, thereby accumulating substantial practical experience. Possesses an inherent professional sensitivity to key issues in criminal defense, such as evidence review and procedural compliance.
We are committed to meticulously analyzing cases from an investigative perspective and comprehensively managing risks through a commercial and civil-law mindset, thereby providing clients with precise, pragmatic, actionable legal services that are procedurally compliant and offer comprehensive risk control.
This article and its contents are shared by
for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal opinions, advice, or a basis for decision-making provided by the firm or its attorneys. If you require legal advice or a professional legal analysis, please contact the attorneys at
, or leave your contact information via private message on our WeChat official account. If you wish to reprint this article, please contact the official account editor via the backend.
Past issuesRecommendation
Zhiheng Legal Education
Zhiheng Perspective
Zhiheng Analyzes the Law
Low-altitude navigation
Zhiheng · Introduction