School Logistics Manager and Accomplice Sentenced for Embezzling Over 600,000 Yuan via Fake Jobs

Deep News
Sep 07

A school logistics supervisor in Ningbo, along with a cleaning service manager, has been handed prison sentences for a two-year scheme that funneled more than 600,000 yuan in school funds through seven fictitious cleaner positions. The fraud, which included fabricated attendance records and regular monthly salary payments, collapsed after a tipped-off employee reported the anomaly.

In June 2026, the Yinzhou District Procuratorate initiated public prosecutions against the two individuals, identified as Li and Mao. By early July of the same year, the Yinzhou District People's Court convicted them of职务侵占罪 (duty embezzlement), sentencing Li to one year in prison and Mao to nine months behind bars, suspended for one year and two months. The duo has since returned all illicit gains in full, a factor that influenced the court's decision.

Li, serving as the logistics manager for the school, was responsible for overseeing and assessing the performance of the contracted property management company. Mao held the position of cleaning manager for that same company. After becoming familiar with each other through daily interactions, they conspired in early 2021 to exploit systemic vulnerabilities for profit. The scheme leveraged Li's authority to sign off on attendance sheets and payroll confirmations, a necessary step before the school's finance department released funds to the property firm, which would then distribute salaries to individual bank cards.

Given the high turnover typical of cleaning staff, they reasoned that inflating the roster would go unnoticed. Acting on this, Li used identity documents from relatives and friends to create seven fictional cleaner identities. Mao handled the paperwork, signing false labor agreements with the property company and entering fabricated clock-in records into the system for these "ghost employees." Li's approval powers ensured these false records cleared the audit process, with the school disbursing salaries each month into accounts that, despite being opened under the names of relatives and friends, were entirely controlled by Li.

The profits were withdrawn in cash and split between the two. This continued for over two years, accumulating to more than 600,000 yuan in embezzled funds. The scam began to unravel in September 2023 when a real cleaner on the school's staff noticed several listed "colleagues" who never appeared on site yet were receiving paychecks. Suspicion turned to frustration, prompting him to file a report with the school. Initially believing the property company was solely responsible, the school filed a civil lawsuit against it. However, as the court reviewed financial transactions during the civil proceedings, it discovered that the falsely claimed wages were being funneled into bank accounts controlled by Li, exposing the inside job.

The school subsequently filed a criminal complaint. After a police investigation transferred the case to the Yinzhou District Procuratorate for review in June 2026, prosecutors examined bank statements and the false labor agreements, concluding that Li, leveraging his position and authority to abuse his responsibilities, had colluded with Mao to illegally appropriate the school's property on a significant scale. Both were found guilty of duty embezzlement. Despite not being a school employee, Mao was treated as an accomplice for conspiring in the crime and utilizing Li's official role. With full restitution of the embezzled funds after their arrest, the court issued the final sentences.

Disclaimer: Investing carries risk. This is not financial advice. The above content should not be regarded as an offer, recommendation, or solicitation on acquiring or disposing of any financial products, any associated discussions, comments, or posts by author or other users should not be considered as such either. It is solely for general information purpose only, which does not consider your own investment objectives, financial situations or needs. TTM assumes no responsibility or warranty for the accuracy and completeness of the information, investors should do their own research and may seek professional advice before investing.

Most Discussed

  1. 1
     
     
     
     
  2. 2
     
     
     
     
  3. 3
     
     
     
     
  4. 4
     
     
     
     
  5. 5
     
     
     
     
  6. 6
     
     
     
     
  7. 7
     
     
     
     
  8. 8
     
     
     
     
  9. 9
     
     
     
     
  10. 10