|
|
|
The parties made a false marriage to evade debt, the man gambled dogs and gave the property to the woman, himself took on debts, planning to rely on this to dodge debts. The first agreement stated that they would split the property equally, but the second agreement wrote all of the property to the woman, herself taking on debts. If another agreement was different from this one, then everything would be according to this agreement. The man did not recognize this agreement and demanded handwriting analysis. The woman demanded fingerprint analysis. Whether handwriting analysis or fingerprint analysis were conducted by the man, he claimed that he had been tricked into signing his name and pressing his fingerprint, but he could not provide evidence that it was not him who signed and pressed his fingerprint. Since the man is an adult, the court concluded that he signed the agreement. |
|
发表于