诚信诉讼典型意义：海南某实业公司与福建某建设公司等施工合同纠纷案

海南法院社会主义核心价值观典型案例（五）

Model Cases of Core Socialist Values 

from Hainan Courts（V）

当事人在诉讼中伪造证据，

可以按照妨碍民事诉讼进行罚款

Any party forging evidence during litigation may be fined for impairing civil actions

——海南某实业公司与福建某建设公司、

第三人郑某建设工程

施工合同纠纷案

The case between Hainan X Industrial Company and Fujian X Construction Company & the third person Zheng X over construction project engineering contract dispute

核心价值　Core values 

诚信诉讼　honest litigation

基本案情　Basic Facts

在海南某实业公司与福建某建设公司及（独立请求权）第三人郑某建设工程施工合同纠纷一案审理过程中，各方当事人均签署了《诚信诉讼保证书》，承诺诚信诉讼。诉讼中，海南某实业公司和福建某建设公司向法院提交了一份《施工合同》及28份落款时间跨度三年的关于确认工程量的往来函件。经委托司法鉴定机构鉴定，显示：《施工合同》上福建某建设公司印章与其备案印章不一致；28份往来函件的纸张特性一致、印刷体文字系同一机具形成，文本上的签字及海南某实业公司的印章均不是按照各自标注落款时间间隔形成，而是相近时间内书写或盖印形成。

When the court was handling the case of construction project engineering contract dispute between Hainan X Industrial Company and Fujian X Construction Company & the third person Zheng X (independent claim), the litigants all signed the Commitment of Honest Litigation to swear honesty during litigation. Hainan X Industrial Company and Fujian X Construction Company, during the litigation, submitted to the court a copy of the Engineering Contract and 28 letters of correspondence confirming engineering quantities, the signing dates of which extended for a period of three years. The investigation by the commissioned judicial appraisal agency shows that the stamp of Fujian X Construction Company on the Engineering Contract is different from its filed stamp, and that the papers of the 28 letters are consistent in features, the printed characters come from the same machine, and the signatures and the stamps of Hainan X Industrial Company on the documents are not created at the time intervals as indicated by their respective dates, instead, they are written or stamped within a narrow time frame. ■

判决结果　Judgement

法院认为，根据司法鉴定意见，海南某实业公司和福建某建设公司共同实施了伪造《施工合同》和28份往来函件的行为。故法院以伪造证据为由，决定对两公司各处以50万元罚款。两公司不服该决定，向海南省高级人法院申请复议。海南省高级人民法院审查后维持一审法院的处罚决定。在案件实体处理时，法院亦否定了前述伪造证据的证据资格和证明力。

The court held that, based on the judicial investigation opinions, Hainan X Industrial Company and Fujian X Construction Company jointly forged the Engineering Contract and the 28 letters of correspondence, and decided on the ground of forging evidence to impose a fine of 500,000 yuan on each of the two companies. The two companies refused to accept the decision and applied to Hainan High People’s Court for a review. Hainan High People’s Court reviewed the case and sustained the punishment decision of the first-instance court. When handling the case in detail, the court also disqualified and invalidated the aforesaid forged evidence. ■

典型意义　Significance

诚信诉讼是诉讼参与人应当遵循的基本原则，也是构建诚信社会的重要组成部分。不得伪造证据，是当事人参加诉讼活动的行为底线和禁止触碰的红线。当事人在诉讼活动中伪造证据，严重破坏了诉讼秩序，侵害了对方当事人合法权益，损害了司法公信力，直接影响了人民群众的司法体验和对公平正义的合理期待。本案中，人民法院对伪造证据的不诚信诉讼行为敢于亮剑，开出百万罚单，可以有效铲除不诚信诉讼滋生的土壤，净化诉讼环境。本案对于引导人民群众依法诚信诉讼、维护司法权威、弘扬诚实守信的社会主义核心价值观以及优化海南自贸港法治环境具有积极作用。

Honest litigation should be the basic principle for all litigants to follow, as well as an important component in the construction of a credible society. Not to forge evidence should be a bottom line of all parties involved in litigation, a red line that should not be touched. The litigants forging evidence during litigation serious disrupts the litigation order, infringes upon the lawful rights of the other parties, compromises the judicial credibility, and directly disappoints the public in its reasonable expectation of fairness and justice. In this case, the people’s court takes solid actions to punish the dishonest conduct of forging evidence, and metes out a fine of 1,000,000 yuan, which will effectively discourage dishonest litigation and purify litigation environment. This case plays an active role in guiding the public to act honestly in litigation, safeguard judicial authority, advocate the core socialist value of integrity, and optimize the rule-of-law environment in Hainan Free Trade Port. ■