What information did the court reveal about the case of "selling 150 bowls of cooked meat with three products"?

Recently, Chongqing No.1 Intermediate People's Court partially explained and explained the penalty case of "three no products" disputed by netizens. Chongqing No.1 Intermediate People's Court said that the case had reached the second trial stage, and the court staff had contacted the parties and informed them that they had the right to take the initiative to file a complaint with the court within six months after the judgment of the second trial took effect, which means that the result of the second trial was not the final result. I also hope that netizens can continue to pay attention to this case rationally.

First of all, this fight is completely? The public says that the public is right, and the woman says that the woman is right? Mr. Shao, a counterfeiter, said that the merchants didn't know that the three products couldn't be sold, and they also questioned that the old lady who came forward didn't cook braised pork with plum vegetables. Mr. Shao believes that the merchants take the initiative to let an old lady come out to respond to this matter, in fact, they are guiding everyone to cyber violence and using everyone's sympathy for the weak to exert public pressure. Personally, I think Mr. Shao's statement is not unreasonable, and this guess is also reasonable.

Secondly, the defendant has always stressed that although he sells three no products, Mr. Shao's behavior is completely extortion, and the response has always been the elderly. The family members of the elderly have never come forward, and it is a fact that the merchants sell three products. The court will also give the fairest judgment according to law. At present, there may still be a lot of evidence and details that have not been announced. I hope netizens can eat melons rationally. After all, there are too many cases of reversal before, and I don't know if it will be reversed this time.

The final result of the second trial was that the defendant was sentenced to pay the plaintiff ten times the price. Many netizens are dissatisfied with this result. They all thought it was malicious extortion by the plaintiff. The court has made it clear that this judgment is not final and the defendant still has the right to continue to appeal. If the defendant chooses to appeal, the lawsuit will continue.