Previous 1 / 4 Next

https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_6198322 最高院：孙小果死刑复核裁定书（全文公布）_澎湃号·政务_... 1 of 4 要闻深度直播视频时事国际财经科技暖闻澎湃号智库思想生活问吧上海奔流健康更多最高院：孙小果死刑复核裁定书（全文公布）查看更多漳县法院关注 2020-02-22 00:00 甘肃来源：澎湃新闻·澎湃号·政务字号查看更多开始答题中华人民共和国最高人民法院刑事裁定书原审被告人孙小果，曾用名陈果，男，汉族，1977年10月27日出生，住云南省昆明市。1995年12月20日因犯强奸罪被云南省昆明市盘龙区人民法院判处有期徒刑三年，查看更多后因非法保外就医，未收监执行。1997年12月22日因本案被逮捕。1999年3月9日被判处死刑缓期二年执行，2007年9月27日被再审改判有期徒刑二十年。经减刑于2010年4 月11日释放。现在押。 Android版云南省昆明市中级人民法院审理昆明市人民检察院指控原审被告人孙小果犯强奸罪， iPhone版强制猥亵、侮辱妇女罪，故意伤害罪，寻衅滋事罪一案，于1998年2月18日作出（1998）昆刑初字第74号刑事判决，认定孙小果犯强奸罪，判处死刑，剥夺政治权利扫码下载澎湃新闻客户端 iPad版终身；犯强制侮辱妇女罪，判处有期徒刑十五年；犯故意伤害罪，判处有期徒刑七年；犯寻衅滋事罪，判处有期徒刑三年，与原犯强奸罪未执行刑期二年四个月又十二天并罚，决定执行死刑，剥夺政治权利终身。宣判后，孙小果不服，提出上诉。云南省高级人民法院于1999年3月9日作出（1998）云高刑一终字第104号刑事判决，对孙小果所犯强奸罪改判死刑，缓期二年执行，剥夺政治权利终身，维持其余定罪量刑，决定执行死刑，缓期二年执行，剥夺政治权利终身。判决生效后，孙小果及其近亲属关于澎湃加入澎湃联系我们广告合作法律声明隐私政策澎湃矩阵新闻报料沪ICP备14003370号沪公网安备31010602000299号提出申诉。云南省高级人民法院于2006年7月3日作出（2006）云高刑监字第48号再审互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120170006 决定，对本案启动再审，并于2007年9月27日作出（2006）云高刑再终字第12号刑事增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-2017116 判决，对孙小果所犯强奸罪改判有期徒刑十五年，维持其余定罪量刑，决定执行有期 © 2014-2025 上海东方报业有限公司徒刑二十年。云南省高级人民法院发现本案原审过程中审判人员涉嫌受贿、徇私舞弊，已经发生法律效力的（2006）云高刑再终字第12号刑事判决认定事实和适用法律确有错误，经该院审判委员会讨论，于2019年7月18日作出（2019）云刑监1号再审决定，对原审被告人孙小果原犯强奸罪、强制侮辱妇女罪、故意伤害罪、寻衅滋事罪的犯罪事实进行再审。经依法开庭审理，云南省高级人民法院于2019年12月20日作出（2019）云刑再3 号刑事判决，撤销该院（2006）云高刑再终字第12号刑事判决，撤销该院（1998）云高刑一终字第104号刑事判决中对孙小果的定罪量刑部分；维持云南省昆明市中级人民法院（1998）昆刑初字第74号刑事判决中对孙小果的定罪量刑部分，与原犯强奸罪未执行刑期二年四个月又十二天并罚，决定执行死刑，剥夺政治权利终身；与该院反馈（2019）云刑终1321号刑事判决和云南省玉溪市中级人民法院（2019）云04刑初149 号刑事判决对孙小果判处有期徒刑二十五年，剥夺政治权利五年，并处没收个人全部财产的刑罚合并，决定执行死刑，剥夺政治权利终身，并处没收个人全部财产，并依 26/02/2025, 11:16

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Sun Xiaoguo（孙小果）

CASE BRIEF

Jurisdiction

China

Nationalities

Chinese

Case Title: Sun Xiaoguo’s rape and Other Crimes

Age at Offence: 20

Age Group at Offence: Adult (18 to 59)

Gender: Male

Religious Group at Offence: Unknown

Jurisdiction - Geolocation

Latitude: 35.8617

Longitude: 104.1954

Jurisdiction - Geolocation (linked CASE BRIEF): China

Contributing TRP Partner

The Rights Practice (United Kingdom)
The Rights Practice Partner (China)

Latest Country's Death Penalty Status

Retentionist

Case Current Status: Closed: Executed

Year when sentenced to Death Row: 1990s: 1998

Method of Execution: Unknown

Rights Allegedly Violated

Fair Trial and Due Process: Fair investigation & fair disclosure
Fair Trial and Due Process: Right to fair hearing by impartial, independent tribunal

Nature of Offences for Death Penalty

Sexual Violence: Child Rape
Sexual Violence: Gang Rape
Other

Expert Evidence

Forensic/Medical evidence: Medical examination (victim/accused, age determination etc)

Case Background (300 words max): In 1997, Sun Xiaoguo was sentenced to death for raping women in public, illegally detaining individuals, and raping underage girls, crimes deemed egregious under the 1979 Criminal Law. His sentence was later commuted to a suspended death sentence on appeal. In 2006, the Yunnan High People’s Court retried the case, reducing his sentence to 20 years. After multiple reductions, he was released in April 2010 after serving 12 years.

In 2018, China launched a nation-wide crackdown on organised crime, deploying central supervision teams to provinces for key investigations. Sun was investigated for his organised crime in entertainment venues, leading Yunnan police to uncover his past convictions and suspicious sentence reductions. In April 2019, the case was escalated to the central supervision team on crackdown of organised crime, which shortly provided direct guidance on reinvestigation. Following this, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection, and the National Supervisory Commission stationed personnel to investigate judicial corruption linked to his unlawful sentence reductions.

In July 2019, the Yunnan High People’s Court initiated a retrial of the 2006 judgment, and reinstated the original death sentence in December 2019. On February 12, 2020, the Supreme People’s Court approved the death sentence. Sun was executed on February 20, 2020. Dozens of judicial officials involved were penalised.

This case drew national public debate on the systemic judicial corruption and power abuse. It was recognised as a landmark in the anti-organised crime and anti-corruption campaign, with state media producing documentaries to underscore its significance.

Under international human rights laws, rape that did not result in deaths should not be recognised as "most serious crimes" warranting the death penalty. The direct intervention of central judicial and Party discipline authorities reflects a consistent pattern in handling high-profile cases during nationwide crackdowns.

Defence Arguments (200 words max.): The High Court’s retrial judgment and the Supreme People’s Court’s ruling provided very little information on the defence arguments. The retrial judgment only noted that Sun and his legal counsel contested the rape charges, arguing that the identified victims had engaged voluntarily, in an attempt to refute the allegations.

Judgement with Headnotes (200 words max)

The Supreme People’s Court concluded that

Sun forcibly engaged in sexual relations with underage females through violent and coercive means, constituting the crime of rape.
His actions of using violence to publicly subject female victims to forcible humiliation and intentional harm constitute the crimes of forcible molestation of women and intentional injury.
His actions of colluding with others to chase, intercept, and beat individuals in public places, thereby disrupting social order, constitute the crime of provoking disturbances.
Sun raped multiple women, and some of these victims were abducted and raped in public places, making the circumstances particularly egregious, warranting the death penalty.
Furthermore, Sun also exhibited circumstances of raping young girls, raping underage females, illegally restricting the personal freedom of victims, committing rape in public, and being a repeat offender of rape, which should be severely punished according to the law.
Sun committed exceptionally cruel and egregious crimes with severe consequences, driven by deep malice and posing a high risk to society. His actions reflect an incorrigible nature, warranting the harshest legal punishment.

Legal Representation Received

Pre-trial: Unknown
Trial: Unknown
Appeal: Unknown
Second Appeal: Unknown

Legislation Related to the Offence(s)

Article 236 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China Article 236.
Article 246 and Article 250 of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China.
Article 350(1) of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China):