I don't know why someone like Lao Liutou would get into such a mess. I have seen some of his affiliation documents, which should belong to the company's problems. At the company level, if the VAT invoice is falsely issued, the problem of Lao Liutou lies. When the company has a problem, he is the chief financial officer. In fact, Lao Liutou is in This company has not been working for a long time. Although he is the chief financial officer, he has not dealt with such business as invoices, and he resigned from the company more than half a year before the company's accident. However, financial director, this position is quite sensitive, because the first impression is that you, as the company's financial director, falsely issue VAT invoices, and you say that you are not involved, so how is that possible. Logically, it is understandable to think so, but everything must be based on evidence. In all the documents, the accusation against Lao Liutou is actually very weak. There is no relevant evidence to prove that Lao Liutou was directly involved. Even the top and bottom confessions such as the financial manager and the company's main person in charge are not harmful to Lao Liutou. place. It's a pity that the case handling process is quite slow. After the first trial is over, I don't know if there will be a good result in the second trial, but after three years, basically people are in a very powerless state.

I don't know why someone like Lao Liutou would get into such a mess. I have seen some of his affiliation documents, which should belong to the company's problems. At the company level, if the VAT invoice is falsely issued, the problem of Lao Liutou lies. When the company has a problem, he is the chief financial officer. In fact, Lao Liutou is in This company has not been working for a long time. Although he is the chief financial officer, he has not dealt with such business as invoices, and he resigned from the company more than half a year before the company's accident. However, financial director, this position is quite sensitive, because the first impression is that you, as the company's financial director, falsely issue VAT invoices, and you say that you are not involved, so how is that possible. Logically, it is understandable to think so, but everything must be based on evidence. In all the documents, the accusation against Lao Liutou is actually very weak. There is no relevant evidence to prove that Lao Liutou was directly involved. Even the top and bottom confessions such as the financial manager and the company's main person in charge are not harmful to Lao Liutou. place. It's a pity that the case handling process is quite slow. After the first trial is over, I don't know if there will be a good result in the second trial, but after three years, basically people are in a very powerless state.