不可否认的一个现实是，近几年来“网络暴力”越来越普遍了。不断发生的“网络暴力”事件造成了诸如受害人自杀的严重后果，引发了大家的广泛关注。“网络暴力”是一个复杂的社会问题，涉及到方方面面。作为法律人，这其中涉及的法律问题需要我们关注与研究。那么，我国目前司法实践中针对“网络暴力”的处理是何现状，可能是我们首先需要了解的。通过案例无疑是窥一斑而知全豹的有效途径。为此，笔者在中国裁判文书网上分别以“网

China is currently experiencing a very rapid development of information networks, which has greatly promoted the development of the new economy and the convenience of social public life, but at the same time, it has also spawned new cyberspace chaos, with frequent occurrences of malignant cyber violence. Cyber violence is different from traditional crime in that it exhibits new types and characteristics of behavior. For the criminal legal regulation of cyber violence, there is already sufficient necessity and legitimacy. Although the current criminal legal system in China can evaluate and combat online violence to a certain extent, there are obvious problems such as insufficient regulatory scope and insufficient regulatory force, which are difficult to adapt to the current situation of effective governance of illegal crimes and need to be optimized and improved.

近年来，互联网给人们提供了自由开放的交流平台，使得不同的观点、思想都可以在网上进行交流，而随着网络社交媒体日益发达，网络言论的表达渠道更加畅通、传播交流更加便捷，极大地提升了社会公众的文化、娱乐生活水平。但不可否认，因互联网社交媒体言论引发的名誉侵权纠纷也随之增多。部分网民有不同意见就出言相讥、为发泄情绪而言论偏激、为个人利益而假借舆论监督发表煽动性言论，演变成网络暴力进而时不时地刺痛人们的神经

Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) is a form of corporate property rights that emerged in the 1950s in the United States and has been widely implemented in the past 20 years. It belongs to a special compensation plan, which refers to a benefit sharing mechanism and a participation mechanism that allows employees to enjoy residual claims through holding stocks in order to attract, retain, and motivate company employees. An employee stock ownership plan is essentially a benefit plan that is applicable to all employees of the company. The company allocates shares of the company based on factors such as salary grade or working years.

No, you need to go through change registration to have a change in property rights. The following precedents are helpful for analysis, Supreme People's Court (2021) No. 2847: "After review, our court believes that the house in question was purchased during the marriage between Huang Aiju and Chen Yuguang, and was originally their joint property. Although the divorce agreement between Chen Yuguang and Huang Aiju stipulates that the house in question belongs to Huang Aiju, the divorce agreement is only an internal agreement between the two parties, and does not have the legal effect of directly causing changes in the property rights of the house." (2021) No. 7090 of the Supreme Law and People's Republic of China: "The divorce agreement signed by Deng Lihong and Li Ge states that the house involved in the case belongs to Li Jingyuan. Although the agreement on the house involved in the divorce agreement does not directly have the legal effect of changing the property rights, the house involved in the case is the common property of the husband and wife during the marriage relationship between Deng Lihong and Li Geyuan. When the marriage relationship is dissolved, both parties agree that the house involved in the case belongs to their son Li JingyuanIt has a life support function. "Li Jingyuan has the right to request that the ownership change of the house involved be registered in his name." Both support this view, but the opposite party has the right to request that the ownership change of the house be registered in its name.

Financial leasing has both financing and financial properties. "If there is only financing, but no financial assets, it is likely to be recognized as borrowing in the name of financial leasing.". After financial leasing is recognized as lending, the legal norms governing financial leasing no longer apply, but instead apply to the legal norms and judicial rules governing private lending. How to identify and handle the withholding rent, deposit, handling fee, down payment, consulting fee, interest, overdue interest, liquidated damages, and other related expenses agreed upon by the parties in the financial leasing contract? This article will reveal the answers to the above questions through relevant cases.

As an important vehicle for collective investment, private equity funds (hereinafter referred to as "private equity funds", "RMB funds", or "funds") have a significant impact on the performance of the fund, and have a significant impact on the establishment, investment, and exit stages of the fund, as well as on fund investors, fund managers The fund itself and different entities of the invested enterprise have different applications and impacts. Therefore, an important driving force for the development of private equity funds is taxation. From the development of RMB funds over the past 30 years, it can be seen that the structure of RMB funds has undergone multiple rounds of iterative evolution. Although the fund structure has become more complex, the nature of the income received by various tax payers, especially fund managers, is relatively clearer, and the tax burden borne by each entity is more determined and easy to handle (as shown in the figure below). It can be said that tax considerations are the most important force driving the evolution of the fund structure.

Recently, topics such as "Tan Tan's traffic has been completely removed from the shelves", "Tan Qiao's claim that he may face tens of millions of claims", and others have successively appeared on the hot search, triggering various heated discussions among netizens.

In the author's article "Is the lessee bankrupt and the financial leasing lessor entitled to exercise the right to retrieve the leased property?", we have concluded through discussion that if the lessee enters bankruptcy proceedings, under certain conditions such as prior registration, the financial leasing lessor can exercise the right to retrieve the leased property. Based on this premise, in conjunction with Article 752 of the Civil Code, which states, "The lessee shall pay the rent as agreed. If the lessee fails to pay the rent within a reasonable period of time after being urged, the lessor may request payment of the full rent, or may terminate the contract and take back the leased property." The author understands that in the event of the lessee's bankruptcy, there should also be two ways for the financial leasing lessor to claim rights, One is to claim a claim on rent, and the other is to affirm the ownership of the leased property and recover the leased property. The question is, how can these two rights be exercised when the lessee goes bankrupt (including bankruptcy reorganization, the same below)? If the financial leasing lessor has filed a rental claim with the bankruptcy administrator, can it claim ownership of or retrieve the leased property after that? This article will reveal the answers to the above questions by analyzing relevant cases.