"Man uprooting seedlings to protect ancestral graves" sentenced, drawing attention. Lawyer: Rights protection should not abuse private remedies; civil resolution should be prioritized.

Ask AI · How should reason and law be balanced in this case?

On April 3, according to Dahe Daily, during the Qingming Festival when a 53-year-old man was sweeping a grave, he discovered that someone had planted betel nut seedlings all around his ancestral grave. After asking around, he learned it was planted by clan relatives. He went to confront them twice to argue his case, but without success. He then pulled out all 329 betel nut seedlings together with his younger brother, only to find that this brought him prison.

▲Photo: TuChong Creative

On March 27, 2026, the People’s Court of Ledong Li Autonomous County, Hainan Province, issued a related first-instance criminal judgment. The judgment stated that the land parcel was collectively owned by a villagers’ committee in a village in Ledong. The 329 betel nut seedlings that were uprooted were collectively valued at 11,186 yuan. The court held that after being summoned, Chen Moujia voluntarily surrendered, which constitutes surrender; he pleaded guilty and accepted punishment in court. After the incident, he deposited a compensation guarantee of 11,186 yuan, demonstrating remorse. Therefore, it was appropriate to give him a lighter sentence and handle the case more leniently. Ultimately, in accordance with law, the court found the defendant Chen Moujia guilty of the crime of intentional destruction of property, sentencing him to nine months’ imprisonment, with a one-year suspended sentence.

As soon as this case was reported, “uprooting seedlings and receiving a sentence” quickly became a focus. Some netizens discussed Chen Moujia’s “original intention to defend his rights,” saying his actions had a cause and were understandable. Others said the court’s judgment was “well-founded in law” and there was nothing improper. On the one hand is legally rigorous conviction and sentencing; on the other is local folk custom under the influence of emotion and reason. How should we understand the conflict between emotion and law behind this case? Red Star News interviewed multiple lawyers to discuss the legal issues involved.

Self-help by removing the seedlings constitutes private remedy

Rights protection should prioritize civil resolution

On April 4, Zhao Liangshan, a lawyer from Shaanxi Hengda Law Firm, said in an interview with Red Star News that, from a legal perspective, to define villagers’ rights regarding ancestral graves, according to Article 994 of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China, the deceased’s body and bones, etc., are protected by law, and close relatives enjoy personality interests including the right to pay memorial respects, the right to maintain the integrity of ancestral graves, and the right to ensure peaceful observance of rituals.

“Although the land involved in this case is collectively owned by the village, Chen Moujia’s family does not enjoy land ownership. However, Chen Mouyi planted crops around the ancestral grave, disturbing the normal order of the family’s worship rituals and violating public order and good morals, thereby infringing on Chen Moujia’s lawful personality interests,” Zhao said. If Chen intends to defend his rights, he should follow Article 179 of the Civil Code: resolve the matter through negotiation with the other party, request mediation by the villagers’ committee or township government, file a civil lawsuit to seek an order to stop the infringement and remove the obstruction, or report to the police to seek public security administrative punishment and other lawful means—rather than privately destroying the other party’s property.

Lawyer Fu Jian from Henan Zejin Law Firm also said that ancestral graves carry the descendants’ longing for their ancestors. Planting trees around the grave within a reasonable range may affect worship activities and violate public order and good morals, so the right to request removal of the obstruction exists. However, his self-help removal is private remedy, and private remedy is only permitted by law in limited circumstances where the situation is urgent and there is no time to seek public remedy.

“Rights protection must not abuse private remedy, and civil resolution should be prioritized,” Fu Jian said. In this case, Chen Moujia had sufficient time to seek administrative mediation or civil litigation and did not have the urgency required for private remedy. He could resolve the issue through mediation within the clan, mediation by the villagers’ committee, or by suing.

Lawyers’ analysis:

How to balance emotion and law

In Zhao Liangshan’s view, Chen Moujia’s “uprooting seedlings” behavior fully meets the elements of the crime of intentional destruction of property. The core legal basis is Article 275 of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China. Subjectively, he had direct intent to destroy the other person’s property. Objectively, he carried out the act of uprooting 329 betel nut seedlings. After appraisal, the property value was 11,186 yuan, reaching the filing threshold for a crime involving a relatively large amount of intentional destruction of property. It infringed the legal object of the crime—Chen Mouyi’s lawful property ownership—and there are no unlawful exculpatory circumstances such as self-defense or emergency avoidance. The court, taking into account circumstances such as Chen’s surrender, his guilty plea and acceptance of punishment, and his deposit of the compensation guarantee, gave a lighter sentence. It did not change the legal characterization of his conduct as a crime, and the logic for conviction fully aligns with the application conditions of that article of the criminal law.

How should this case balance the boundary between emotion and law?

Zhao said that the folk custom of “no planting crops around ancestral graves” is, in essence, public order and good morals within rural society. In judicial practice, the principles of giving priority to law while taking good morals into account are followed. Pursuant to Article 8 of the Civil Code, civil subjects engaging in civil activities may not violate public order and good morals. Courts will treat reasonable customs as factors for fault division and responsibility allocation in civil disputes, but customs may not override mandatory legal provisions or other people’s lawful property rights.

“In the judgment of this case, the court only found that the dispute arose from a land issue and did not treat this custom as a basis to exempt Chen Moujia from liability or reduce the crime. The court strictly centered its ruling on the protection of property rights by law, without breaking through the legal principle that law should have priority over folk customs, reflecting the judicial principle that law stands above custom,” Zhao said.

Because a civil dispute between relatives escalated into a criminal case, from the standpoint of formal legality, the amount of Chen Moujia’s destruction of property met the standard for the crime, and the conviction is in line with the provisions of the criminal law. “Civil disputes should be resolved by first applying civil laws such as the Civil Code, using methods like civil compensation and mediation. This case is a dispute among relatives and local neighbors, and there is a reasonable cause,” Zhao believed. Civil remedies can be handled appropriately through civil channels.

Fu Jian stated that transforming a civil dispute into a criminal case is formally compliant with the law. In disputes among friends and neighbors that lead to criminal charges—especially when the amount meets the threshold—and where the offender has actively compensated and pleaded guilty and regretted his wrongdoing, it is also possible to consider resolving the matter first through civil or administrative channels.

Red Star News reporter Luo Danni

Editor Xu Yuan

Related reports

During Qingming, a man discovers relatives have planted betel nut seedlings beside his ancestral grave; he removes them himself and is sentenced to 9 months.