000 yuan. First Instance rejected the claim.

n2jF8G1qG

There are a promissory note signed by the woman,http://cutyayu.sakura.ne.jp/cabbs/sunbbs.cgi?mode=form&no=110&page=%5B/ur%3C/a%3E,scarpe hogan interactive, fingerprints. The fact that part of the loan is printed handwriting
□ reporter Han Jingwei correspondent Chen Yu if
Read tips
And her boyfriend of three months after intercourse, boyfriend sudden departure. Soon, however,http://vegalta7.s156.xrea.com/aska/aska.cgi/link, her boyfriend was holding a 850,000 yuan IOU, the girlfriend Guo court to require the woman to repay. After identification,scarpe hogan interactive, the woman's signature on the IOUs, fingerprints, Guo indeed authentic. See it all, the defendant Guo dumbfounded.
WASHINGTON Zhengzhou Guo,http://www.haokc.com/space/space.php?uid=1043913&do=blog&id=8983092,nike tn, 35, in February 2008, was introduced to more than their 13-year-old Lee, not long after the two established a relationship.
"We were quite right temper, though understanding is not long, but I think others good, they live together with him." Recalled the life, Guo was filled with sweet. Who would have thought did not last long, in August 2010, I do not know what the reason, Lee suddenly walked out, when Guo legitimate doubts, after more than two months,http://eclub.cho88.com/blog.cgi, Guo has received a court summons,http://www.casebook.jp,Nike air max pas cher, tell her what her boyfriend Lee .
"How could I owe him 850,moncler outlet,000 yuan of money?" Guo baffled, had a hasty response.
Man
The woman he borrowed to buy a 850,000 yuan
The trial, the court between the parties exchange evidence, Guo perplexing: Lee took out a promissory note, on the IOU's half of printed handwriting, states: "Today, by Wu Moumou Bashi Million yuan in cash (850,000 yuan ),http://www.rfccfy.com.cn/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=509011, duration of five months to pay off. "Guo inscribed at the signature and fingerprints.
Lee said, in April 2008, Guo to him to borrow money to buy a house. This 850,000 yuan in their own homes,hogan outlet 2015, 60 million is received land compensation,chaussures nike pas cher, and 25 million is borrowed a friend's. Himself three times the money handed over to Guo,gioielli tiffany, Guo gave him money make up a total IOU.
Later, Guo has not repay. Friends chase chase account was anxious that he had no choice but to sue her court.
Woman
Might be confused written IOU drink
In this regard, Guo felt Lee's argument is ridiculous,http://thehospoda.com/kunena/13-living-here/10566-5228/reply, "goes IOU was forged to him I never borrowed money to buy a house I paid 170,000 yuan down payment, the remaining 30 million is to the bank money loan. Besides, their home land compensation is not so much where he came over 80 million lent me? "
To verify the authenticity of IOU, October 27, 2010,giubbotti woolrich, Guo apply IOU signature and fingerprints on whether the stay of its own identification. The identification results contrary to all expectation, the signature is really Guo handwriting, fingerprints, as well as her pressed.
"Well, I usually like to drink blame estimated day drunk, he loopholes to cheat my signature and fingerprints." Guo regret.
Court
Counterintuitive, a trial of the man lost
Court and obtained evidence from the village showed a Lee from 2003 to April 2008 to receive the land compensation of about 50 million,louboutin soldes, which go from village lijiacun Lee Credit Union name. Credit union deposit transaction and obtained show that from January 2008 to the end of 4, the deposit amount at 40,000 yuan Lee fluctuate.
For the other 25 million, Lee said was commissioned by a friend, but can not provide proof to the court of friends. Later expressly waived proof.
Lee did not agree to a polygraph test.
Court after hearing the view that Mr. Lee and Guo met only three months, Lee said the two sides only and ordinary friendships, lend Guo 850,000 yuan in cash, a large amount of that loan, the borrower is not Lee's behavior consistent with common sense.
In addition, Lee opened a bank account, have access to their accounts during the borrowing records of nearly 40,000 yuan of money, while Lee has called on the 60 million in cash at home,gioielli tiffany, doing so counterintuitive.
Lee provided IOU for half a sheet of A4 paper, the fact that part of the loan printer, just below the IOUs have accused Guo autographed and fingerprints, name in front of Guo also did not specify the words of the borrower, there is the IOU flaws.
November 21, Zhengzhou Zhongyuan District Court after hearing the case verdict: Although Lee provided a promissory note,giubbotti woolrich, but it does not provide sufficient evidence of the fact that the incidence of 850,000 yuan loan, and the loan term Source counterintuitive,http://www.8liuxing.com/home.php?mod=spacecp&ac=blog&blogid=, so the plaintiff requested the defendant Li Guo restitution claims are not supported by borrowing 850,000 yuan. First Instance rejected the claim.