Private entrepreneurship, Horus: Too much trust in the business environment of Youngzhou City, but is being bullied by the Youngzhou Intermediate Court, the Youngzhou City Arbitration Commission, etc., and by the collusion of the official business, which leads to the loss of the blood!

Holloway has been on his case for over 10 years.

For more than a decade, it has become clear that the city government of Yongzhou, the Intermediate Court of Youngzhou City and the Naga City Council have been responsible for the many official institutions that have been responsible for the very essence of the people ' s interests.

In the complaint for seeking redress under the law for the violation of the rights of the company Yingzhou City Limited Liability Company and the erroneous decision of the Youngzhou Arbitration Commission and the Youngzhou Intermediate People ' s Court, the Youngzhou City Council for the defence of the legitimate rights and interests of private entrepreneurs, Horusi wrote:

Alleged person (i): Youngzhou City Limited Liability Company (formerly domiciled at 168 May Bay Road, Cold Beach District, Youngzhou City, Unified Social Credit Code: 9143311003294493648, former legal representative: Deng Tie Sung/Zhao Zhu Ping), whose civil liability has been abolished and is assumed by the Home Company Youngzhou City Development Group Limited Liability Corporation in accordance with the law.

Alleged person (ii): Youngzhou City Urban Development Group Limited Liability Corporation (Yongzhou City Development Group, subject of succession responsibility of the accused (i)). Official website:

。

Alleged unit (iii): Youngzhou Arbitration Commission.

Indicted unit (iv): Youngzhou City Intermediate People ' s Court, Hunan Province.

The Unit (v) Disciplinary Inspection Committee of the City of Youngzhou (the Youngzhou City Inspectorate Committee).

Subject matter of the complaint

(a) Request the Hunan People ' s Government, the National Board of Letters and Visits, the Central Disciplinary Commission, the National Monitoring and Monitoring Board, the Supreme People ' s Court, the Central Council of Law and Law Commission to supervise the relevant departments of the Youngzhou City People ' s Government and the Youngzhou City Development Group Limited Liability Corporation in accordance with the law, and to correct, in accordance with the law, the erroneous arbitration award No. 85 of the Youngzhou Arbitration Commission (2020) and the erroneous civil ruling No. 11 MNT20 of the Youngzhou Intermediate People ' s Court (2021); (a) Civil liability for fundamental breach and tort of the Youngzhou City Investment Limited (the following liability is inherited by Youngzhou City Development Group); (b) To prosecute the failure of the Youngzhou City Board to provide the responsible party with a red head document in accordance with the law in the course of its correspondence; The Youngzhou Arbitration Commission and the Youngzhou Intermediate People's Court were held to have committed "a different decision" in similar cases, in order to shield the responsible party from judicial injustice. The responsible party is ordered to compensate the complainant for the substantial economic losses caused by the fundamental breach and violation, to return all seized documents and to effectively defend the legitimate interests of private entrepreneurs.

I. Factual fundamentals

The complainant, Horusi, is a private investor who responded to the call and commitment of the Youngzhou City Council and the municipal government to return home and start a business. In February 2017, the complainant entered into a lease contract with Youngzhou City Limited, Inc., for the sale of a shop on Youngzhou's Tasty Street, which covers the premises of 473 and 474 Source Street, and plans to invest in the construction of the Youngzhou 's Isabra Cultural House, a programme with the core of the Youngzhou ' s non-invenant 's 'culture, for a period of eight years.

Upon signing the contract, the complainant, at the request of the City Enterprise, delivered to the City Enterprise all core information required to obtain the licence (including original of the "Seper" trademark of Class 25, design of the brand LOGO, project design information, original identity card and copies thereof) and was signed and accepted by Huang Huayun, then the head of the business of the applicant. The complainant then invested in all savings, and on 30 April 2017 completed the full renovation of the shop (with a total of over $600,000 spent on renovation) which was verified, accepted and signed for confirmation by the staff of the City Investment Company.

However, the long-term withholding of the licence from the complainant and the concealment of key facts after receiving documentation from the complainant by the company resulted in the complainant not being able to operate legally for six years after the renovation and the contract was completely frustrated. The complainant repeatedly requested that the information be returned, and the staff of the City Investment Company admitted in a recording with the company's director-general, Zhao Guoping, on 2 January 2021, that "this information is still here, but we can't give you it," and we said "she's looking for us, we lost it, we lost it." Not only did the City Throw company maliciously withhold information, but it also leaked the complainant's trademark authorization information to third parties, resulting in the malicious retrofitting of the trademark "Since Cultural House" after March 2017 (only one month after the complainant submitted the information), the use of the same "Since" and "LOGO" as submitted by the complainant in 2018-2019 by Youngzhou City's isomer technology firm, which successfully registered the 39th class "Sinper" trademark (registration No. 3477198), and the complete appropriation of the claimant's brand rights and interests.

In April 2026, in its Opinion on the Handling of the Herussi Letters and Visits (No. 2026-22 of Young City), City Investment Corporation stated: "For reasons such as internal restructuring of our Department and changes in personnel, other non-original documents have been inadvertently lost, as a result of various searches. The self-identification document further confirms the fact that the City Investment Company was in poor custody and had made a significant mistake.

In particular, the defendant (i) Youngzhou City Limited Corporation has now de-qualified the business in accordance with the law. In accordance with the provisions of the Companies Law of the People ' s Republic of China on the consolidation, separation and succession of companies, and the relevant regulations on State-owned asset management, the full amount of their claims and civil liability shall be inherited by their parent company, Yongzhou City Development Group Limited Liability Corporation (Yongzhou City Development Group) in accordance with the law. The complainant claimed all his rights in accordance with the law from the Youngzhou City Development Group.

II. Factual facts of alleged violations by the accused

(i) Malicious withholding of documentation constitutes a fundamental breach

As a state enterprise, the City Investment Corporation has committed to providing one-stop shops with a certificate (under Youngzhou City Government Young-ju (Yong Zhengwei) (2016)10 Commercial Offering Policy (Temporary)) but has long withheld all the complainant ' s original documents for the certificate and refused to return them.

(ii) Disclosure of trademark information and malicious bid on brand names

While knowing that the "isaphant" brand had been registered in February 2017 (its Letter interview processing opinion self-identified: "February 2017... business sector staff reviewed the information and responded to our office that the "isaphant" brand was registered and not processed", the City Enterprise never informed the complainant of this key information, but continued to withhold it and conceal the facts. The fact that the third party had taken advantage of the trademark "The Viper Cultural Palace" in March 2017 and that Liu Ping, the former director-in-chief of the City Throw company, had used his position was sufficient to prove that the insiders had leaked the complainant's information to third parties, leading to the misalignment of the trademark.

(iii) The whole of the Source Street project is closed and the City Throw company assumes full responsibility

The Quantico Street project was completely closed down in 2018, resulting in the total loss of more than 300 businesses as a result of the disruption of the management of the city's investment company and the failure of all the offers (consolidated facilities, licensing, renovations). However, the City Investment Corporation has made selective payments to the relationship business, paid the plaintiffs no compensation, instead fabricated debts to initiate arbitration to recover rent and applied to the court to include the complainant in the list of untrustworthy implementers, limit high consumption, freeze bank accounts, apply double standards and target retaliation.

III. SERIOUS COMPLIANCE IN ARBITRARY AND JURISDICTION PROCEDURES

(i) Naga County Arbitration Commission award No. 85 (2020) contains multiple violations

The concealment of key evidence: the fact that the City Investment Corporation has consistently refused to submit all original information originally delivered by the claimant in arbitration, the concealment of the central facts of withholding information and the disclosure of trademarks, is consistent with the circumstances of avoidance under article 58 (1) (e) of the Arbitration Act.

(a) The arbitration proceedings were unlawful: the fact that the arbitral tribunal had not informed the complainant in writing of the composition of the tribunal in accordance with the law deprived the complainant of his right to apply for recusal; The accreditation body failed to complete the identification of the second floor office, the warehouse part, and issued only an extrapolation, in violation of the General Principles of Judicial Procedure.

The decision completely evades the core context of the bet on the "isa" brand, mistakenly holding the complainant "unpaid rent constitutes a breach of contract", and dismissing the underlying breach of the CSIC as the primary liability.

(ii) The result of the arbitral award was erroneously upheld by the Youngzhou Intermediate People ' s Court (2021) decision Z11 Mint 20

The complainant applied for the annulment of the arbitral award to the Youngzhou Intermediate People's Court, which did not conduct a substantive review of the grounds for the statutory setting aside, such as the violation of the arbitration procedure, the concealment of evidence by the City Investment Company, and rejected it on the grounds that there was no evidence of "not being the ground for the setting aside" and found that the facts lacked evidence that the applicable law was wrong. The Youngzhou Intermediate People ' s Court still conceals a large number of original case files, and only a small portion of them are made public for Horusi ' s access.

(iii) Discrepancies in the same cases, denial of justice

(a) The case of the same businesser in Yongzhou, the "Bolody KTV", where the court found that the City Enterprise had taken all its faults and paid a high standard of compensation; The complainant ' s case is equally factual, subject and in breach of the law, but is judged to demand payment of rent and full responsibility, creating double standards and seriously undermining the justice and business environment.

The latest evidence indicates that the Bolodys Corporation has entered into a secret agreement with Youngzhou Limited, a Pollardian entertainment store in Yongzhou City, and that, in the same circumstances as Bolodyste has been arbitrated, sued and similarly debatable, the City Enterprise has paid a substantial compensation to Bolodys. The existence of the secret agreement directly confirms that the Youngzhou Arbitration Commission and the Youngzhou Intermediate People's Court are not "case differences" in the same case, but are selective in the application of the law and systematic judicial injustice in the protection of the responsible party. The complainant requested that the higher judicial authorities should, in accordance with the law, take the agreement of compensation and the records of the transfer of funds between the city's investment industry and the Bolodys, and identify the chain of transmission of the benefits.

IV. Letters from the Naga County District Commission dealing with the inactive, cover-up of the responsible parties

In 2026, the complainant went to the Youngzhou City Board of the Naga City Council to negotiate and submit relevant materials. After receiving the Youngzhou City Council, a large volume of information was printed and kept on file. However, the Naga County City Disciplinary Commission did not issue any relevant redhead documents or official letter-calls to the complainant and any decision to process the letter-calls, in accordance with the Regulations on the Work of Letters and Visits and the statutory procedures for handling the matter by the disciplinary inspectorate. At the same time, the Naga County City Council, without fully establishing the facts, remains unwilling to respect the facts and remains a cover for the responsible party, Youngzhou City, to launch the limited liability company (now the Youngzhou City Development Group), which has led to the prosecution's rights being compromised by the "no choice, no procedure" and no other.

(b) The complainant considers that the letter-taking authority should have informed the person in writing, within 15 days of the receipt of the letter-call, of the admissibility of the letter-call pursuant to articles 26 and 31 of the Letter-visiting Regulations; Under the relevant provisions of the Act on Inspection, reports of alleged service violations and offences by the Ombudsman are received and responded to by the law. The above-mentioned actions of the Youngzhou City Council constitute procedural omissions and provide, objectively, protection against prosecution by the responsible party.

V. UNIVERSAL RESPECT OF THE NEW LEADER OF YONG CHOIT

The new leadership of Youngzhou City has repeatedly stated in various public forums that it is necessary to solve historical backlogs and grievances and to optimize the rule of law and business environment. However, this typical backlog of cases between the complainant and the State company, the State Corporation for Limited Liability for the Investment of the City of Zengyongzhou (the current successor, the Youngzhou City Development Group) has not yet attracted sufficient attention, and no substantive review, correction or conciliation proceedings have been initiated, a promise to remain in words and the complainant ' s legitimate rights and interests have been continuously violated.

VI. The claims of the complainants

The huge economic losses suffered by the complainants as a result of the violations committed by the City Investment Corporation include: the investment of over $600,000 in renovations, business losses (in terms of ten-year lease terms) of over $8 million, loss of brand value of over $3 million, the cost of defending rights over 10 years of over $1 million, and the freezing of the complainant ' s bank cards and the blacklist enforcement, totalling no less than $10 million.

In order to defend their legitimate rights and interests, the complainant submitted the following complaints to the Hunan People ' s Government, the State Board of Letters and Visits, the Central Committee of Disciplines, the National Monitoring Board, the Supreme People ' s Court and the Central Council of Law:

(i) I earnestly request the Hunan People ' s Government, the State Office of Letter and Information to give the case the utmost attention and urge the Youngzhou City and the relevant authorities to perform their duties in accordance with the law, and to review the arbitration award No. 85 (2020) of the Youngzhou Arbitration Commission and the Youngzhou Intermediate People ' s Court (2021) Civil Decision No. 2011 Mint 20, to correct the erroneous decision in accordance with the law;

(ii) Requesting legal confirmation that the civil liability of Youngzhou City Limited Corporation after cancellation is to be inherited by Youngzhou City Development Group Limited (Yongzhou City Development Group Group) and ordering Youngzhou City Development Group to legally compensate the applicant for the loss of renovation, business loss, loss of brand value, loss of rights defence, etc., which is not less than RMB 10 million (cf. Yongzhou City ' s "Bolody" equivalent compensation standard);

(iii) Requesting that the Youngzhou City Development Group be ordered to return immediately all originals (including trademark authorizations, photocopies of identity cards, business registration materials, etc.) of the complainant for the registration of his licence and the "Sina Cultural House" brand;

(iv) Requesting the authorities to investigate and hold legally responsible the former General Manager of the Youngzhou Limited Corporation, Liu Ping, the head of the business recruitment agency Huang Hua Yun, for using his position to facilitate the disclosure of business information, maliciously tarnishing trademarks and violating the legitimate rights and interests of private enterprises;

(v) Request the Central Committee and the National Monitoring Board to monitor the failure of the Youngzhou City Board to issue the required red-head documents in dealing with the complainant ' s correspondence, to order him/her to perform his/her supervisory investigation duties in accordance with the law, and to issue an official letter-call receipt and processing document;

(vi) Request the Supreme People's Court, the Youngzhou Intermediate People's Court to obtain, in accordance with the law, the secret compensation agreement and payment of the compensation certificate between Youngzhou City Limited and Bolodys (Bolody Recreation in the Cold Water Beach of Yongzhou City) to identify the underlying causes of the "same verdict" and selective administration of justice in similar cases, and to initiate proceedings for the prosecution of the arbitrators and judges involved in the relevant violations of the law;

(vii) Requesting the relevant authorities to immediately lift the false coercive measures imposed on complainants, such as high consumption restrictions, the untrustworthy lists of persons executed and the freezing of bank accounts, in order to eliminate their negative effects;

(viii) Request the Hunan People's Government to include the case in the list of tasks of the new leadership of Yongzhou City, "Settling the backlog and redressing the grievances", to address the business environment in Youngzhou in accordance with the law, to prevent the recurrence of similar violations of the legitimate rights and interests of private enterprises and to ensure the legal rights of private entrepreneurs and a fair and just market order.

The complainant, Herussie, was a defender for 11 years, and he was left without a chance. I earnestly request the Hunan People ' s Government, the National Board of Letters and Visits, the Supreme People ' s Court and the leadership of the Hunan Provincial Disciplinary Commission to conduct public inquiries and conduct justice, and to urge local governments and the relevant authorities to proceed with the case in accordance with the law and with justice, and to prosecute the person for justice!

Herussi has sent letters to the Hunan People ' s Government and Hunan People ' s Congress, among others, and the issue remains unresolved.

01 / 03

The case-syncs published by the Holloway Public News and other media:

Responsible party: Youngzhou City Investment Corporation, letter-and-visit document in black and white, stating that documents such as the Herussi application for a licence were lost. But Youngzhou just threw in to be unwilling to take responsibility.

The public Hörussi has published several public letters to the City Secretary of Yongzhou City, the Provincial Secretary of Hunan Province and others:

The city of Houxi and Yongzhou, Youngzhou City, has been in several lawsuits:

Looking back at some of the reports written by Horusi, it remains felt that the Communist Party of China is protecting corrupt officials, relying on corrupt officials and deliberately harming the people: the decision of the Supreme People's Court of Hunan Province, the Chief Supervisor of the Supreme People's Court of Hunan Province, the leader of which is the following: I, the reporting person, pursuant to Civil Decision (2021) No. 11-mint 20, the reporting person: Horusi, female, female, reported person: 1, Wei Yong and the judges (Intermediate People's Court of Yongzhou, Hunan Province), 2, Deng Dekkok. and Arbitrator (Yongzhou City Arbitration Commission).

1. The Arbitration Commission ' s award, Yongzhou Award (2020), No. 85 Deng Daek Ke and the arbitrators abused their authority and wrongfully decided.
2. The court of Youngzhou City (2021) Zhum Weiyong and the judges abused their authority and misjudged their decisions.
3. Youngzhou City ' s Insane Technology Industries Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Anser Technology " ). The original data was signed by Pao Jing, when her identity card was copied to us as the basis for receiving the information, with over 300 business certificates issued by the whole Source Source Project being uncertified, another uncertified, red headline 10 clearly stating that all business certificates were processed in accordance with the services of Yongzhou Investment Company and the other with tens of millions of unlicensed compensation (with evidence). The report of the fact that Herussi was a reporter of the abuse of authority by Liu Ping, the director-in-chief of the company Liquor Liability for the Investment of the City of Yongzhou, misappropriated the trademark authorization and project information submitted by me, collaborated with a third party, Yingzhou's Isa-Seater Industries Ltd., deliberately inflating his “isaren” brand trademark (category 39), unlawfully usurping his own “Siper Cultural House of Youngzhou”, causing him to suffer financial losses of $4.79 million. To date, the report has been made that the relevant local authorities of Yongzhou City have not filed a case, have not pursued it, have not returned the trademark, and have violated the laws and regulations of article 44 of the Trademark Act, article 45 of which states that Article: On the registration of Liu Ping, the General Manager, by deception or other improper means, “intentionally violates the lawful rights of others”. It shall be declared null and void in accordance with the law and shall be returned to Herussi himself. There is a clear pattern of serious local protection and cover-up for the dark forces. Factual and evidentiary chain: 1 and Horusi obtained legal authorization for the “Anothera” trademark and started the project. In February 2017, I legally obtained the exclusive authorization (within the scope of the authorization) for the 25th category of the “Anothera” trademark, and planned to create the Youngzhou Man and Viper Cultural Palace on the Youngzhou City Street, for the benefit of the people of Youngzhou. I therefore entered into a Leasing Contract with the City Investment Industry for the Market of Source Street (Face 473, 474, for an eight-year lease, and will present the original of the certificate's original business plan for the foreign-sort culture, the authorization of the 25th class “isagain” trademark. (c) The design of the "isa" brand, the Logo design, project design information, original personal identity card and a copy thereof. Evidence: Lease contracts, trademark authorizations, and handover records of materials amply prove that they are legitimate private entrepreneurs.
4. The information was seized by the city ' s investment industry and released, and the trademarks were immediately taken by third parties. After I submitted my submission in February 2017, the city's investment industry delayed time on the grounds that I had repeatedly requested but refused to retrieve the material, and, using her position, she gave the alien cultural museum trademarks (without a prefix) to others, and in July 2017 Images were placed at the Internet auction. In the same year, the same-mentioned "isa" text and the LOGO information submitted by the author of the same scientific and technical application for registration of the 39th category of "isapi" trademark (core category of the main camp of cultural houses such as tourism) was registered on 28 June 2019 (registration number 3477711998).
5. The city ' s input industry responded to the contradiction and covered the facts, according to the 2026 letter response documents of the city ' s investment industry, which stated that “the business sector has not been able to register the `isagain' brand, has requested that it change its name” “the original identity card has been returned and other documents have been lost”. However, the truth is the opposite:
6. If the “isa” brand is not legally registered, why can a third party use the same name to recoup a trademark only one month after the submission?
7. If I insist on using the “isatrice” brand to prevent a licence, why is it possible for the savesian technology to subsequently register a category 39 trademark in the same way as the LOGO?
8. The so-called “lost information” of the urban estate is evidence of the illegal nature of its seizure, misappropriation and disclosure of its own materials. The response of the City Insurgent Company is itself a strong proof: the Youngzhou City Arbitration Commission Decision (2022) No. 85 (2021) No. 2021 No. 20, Civil Decision No. 11 Mint 20, Youngzhou Intermediate People ' s Court. On the basis of the case file records and some new evidence, the people ' s procuratorates were requested to withdraw the above-mentioned case number in accordance with the law. It acknowledged that it had received its own supporting documentation and that the “isa” brand had been registered (recognised by an uninformed third party) and that the “lost” of the information was misappropriation and misappropriation. Horusi never authorized the use of the “Anothera” trademark by the art of the Viper. I am in possession of a trade name for category 25 “Anothera”, and I have never authorized the use of the “Anothera” text and LOGO for the use of the Insinuation Technology. The term “Anothera” and the LOGO, which are used in the art of the art of the Viper, category 39, are identical to the material submitted to the city's insulation industry, and Liu Ping illegally appropriated and misappropriated his position.
9. The unlawful behaviour of General Manager Liu Ping is defined in accordance with articles 44 and 5 of the Trademarks Act.
10. Liu Ping is suspected of having committed an act of abuse of power or authority. As the then-General Manager of the Youngzhou State Enterprise, Liu Ping seized the trademark authorization, LOGO, and project information legally submitted by Horusi, using his authority to solicit and issue a licence.(b) The release of his information to the contacts and to the foreign-symphony technology, in conjunction with the appropriation of his trademarks and the illegal appropriation of his projects by third parties. The above-mentioned facts and acts are suspected of violating article 271 of the Criminal Code of the People ' s Republic of China, " Offence of Intruding Duty ", and article 397 "Abuse of Office ".
11. The art of the Visper is suspected of maliciously poking trademarks and of undue competition. In cases where the "isatric" brand, which is suspected of being related to the exclusive material submitted by the owner to the city for placement, is involved, the use of the privilege of the job facility to register the 39th class "isa" trademark is fully consistent with articles 44 and 45 of the Trademarks Act, which deal with "registration by deception or other improper means" and "violation of the legal rights of others before them" shall be declared null and void and returned to the person in accordance with the law.
12. The city ' s investment industry and the insinuation of the insinuation of the same technology, in collusion and collusion, and the looting of the project in its entirety, led to the total locking down of my project, the "Insinuary Cultural Palace in Yongzhou ", the total loss of the 4.79 million bloods he had invested, and the subsequent recovery of rent by arbitration, the continuation of the business on the missing list.
13. The obstruction of the exercise of my rights and the problems of local protection have been reported and reported to the local disciplinary committee in Youngzhou, the municipal inspectorate and others, but no criminal cases have been opened and no one has been held accountable. The “Anothera” trademark, category 39, is still illegally held by the foreign-symphony technology, and in its reply to the 2026 letter of the City Investment Industry, I was subjected to arbitration, the freezing of accounts and the high level of confidence. In response to a letter of enquiry, I refused to provide key evidence on the grounds of “loss of information”, “business secrets”, to cover up the facts, to cover up the facts, to cover up the eyes and ears, to the point of being a local tie, a collaboration between the official and the business, a gang, a group of persons, a group division of the stolen and a snake rat. V. Reporting claims: I urge the Higher People ' s Court and the Supervisory Commission of Hunan Province to investigate the facts in accordance with the law, to establish the facts and to urge the relevant authorities to implement them as soon as possible, and to prosecute Liu Ping for illegal appropriation and commission of official offences, Wei Yong, Deng Daek and the arbitrators.
14. Recovery of a trademark of his own legal registration: annulment of the trademark “Anothera” category 39 (registration No.
15. and decision to return it to him; The relevant trademarks, such as those of Class 35, 41 and 43, which were taken by Liu Ping for the purpose of stealing the technology of the Viper and other related parties, were also cancelled.
16. Compensation for damages in accordance with the law: The Visper Technology and City Investment Company is ordered to compensate for direct losses caused by its own investment in the project, anticipated losses in the course of its business, loss of reputation and all economic losses resulting from the incorrect arbitration. Civil Decision No. 2021, No. 11, Mint 20, which identifies errors of law, major evidentiary shortcomings, procedural irregularities and the concealment of the truth by an offence against the trademark of another person, of his own accord. It is revoked by law. The full facts reported by the whistleblower (Herussi) are supported by evidence and are willing to assume full legal responsibility for malicious acts or false reporting. The fact that the case was clear and well-documented was rejected by the Nagazhou court on the grounds of “loss of information” in a “civil dispute” and continued to delay, harbour and make it more difficult to find the High Court and the Supervisory Commission to perform their duties in accordance with the law, to restore the truth, to punish the perpetrators of the violations and to restore justice to me and to establish a just and fair environment of law and order in society. Reporter: 10 June 2026