On September 16, a high-profile case involving the theft of valuable liquor from the home of a retired vice governor in Shandong province once again attracted attention. The court ruled to dismiss the appeal of the housekeeper Li Peng and upheld the original sentence of 10 years and 6 months in prison for theft. The case garnered attention not only because of the significant value of the stolen liquor and other assets but also because during the trial, Li Peng had reported to the disciplinary authorities allegations of bribery and corruption against the employer’s family members. However, the report was not accepted by the court.
According to a report by Caixin on September 16, Li Peng, who hails from Weihai, Shandong, was the housekeeper for a private equity fund company owner Chen Lu (pseudonym) in Qingdao before the incident, responsible for household tasks such as driving and cooking.
The prosecution alleged that between April 2021 and October 2023, Li Peng used keys to Chen Lu and his father’s residences, vehicle access cards, and other means to surreptitiously take away Maotai, Wuliangye, and other valuable liquors for a total illegal profit of 2.435 million Chinese yuan.
In October 2023, Chen Lu’s husband reported the disappearance of Maotai, Wuliangye, red wine, tea leaves, donkey-hide gelatin, watches, diamond rings, and emerald rings from their home, leading to the arrest of Li Peng. Li Peng later admitted to taking expensive alcoholic beverages from Chen Lu and his father’s residences.
Previous public reports mentioned that in court, Chen Lu’s husband, Mr. He, stated that at least 60 boxes of Maotai, 2 boxes of Wuliangye, 20 bottles of red wine, and 5 boxes of tea were stolen from their home.
Li Peng disputed the legal characterization of the case, arguing that his actions should be considered embezzlement rather than theft.
However, the court ultimately determined that Li Peng had repeatedly and secretly taken property with the intent of unlawful possession, constituting theft.
On September 17, 2025, the Huangdao District Court sentenced Li Peng to 10 years and 6 months in prison and fined him in the first instance. Li Peng appealed the decision; on August 25, 2026, the Qingdao Intermediate Court rejected the appeal and upheld the original verdict.
This means that as of now, a final judgment on Li Peng’s theft conviction has been rendered.
Another aspect of the case that garnered attention was Li Peng’s whistleblowing against the employer’s family members during the handling of the case.
Since July 2024, Li Peng and his family had reported to the disciplinary authorities allegations of bribery against Chen Lu, as well as accusations of corruption and unclear sources of significant wealth against his father.
Li Peng believed that his possession of relevant information and reporting should be considered meritorious.
However, the court in the relevant judgments found that these whistleblowing clues had not been verified as valid, and thus did not consider Li Peng to have shown merit.
According to public information, Chen Lu’s father is referred to as Chen Yanming.
Chen Yanming, born in October 1945, served as the vice governor of Shandong province in 1998, and was reappointed in 2003. In December 2006, he became the Vice Chairman of the Standing Committee of the Shandong Provincial People’s Congress, and retired in February 2008.
Chen Yanming has been retired for about 18 and a half years since February 2008; as of September 2026, he is 80 years old.
The final judgment of the Chen Yanming family’s stolen liquor case has sparked discussion among netizens.
Some netizens expressed skepticism, questioning if a vice governor’s family had Maotai and other high-value liquors worth over 2.4 million yuan stolen by a housekeeper, how much more property and savings did they possess?
Some netizens responded that a thorough investigation should be conducted to provide a public explanation.
Previous public reports mentioned that some of the liquor involved in the case had been appraised by the production companies, and part of the submitted Maotai and Wuliangye were found to be counterfeit. However, these appraisal results can only confirm the presence of counterfeit products among the examined liquors and cannot be used to infer that all the liquors involved were fake, let alone deduce any illegal origins.
Chen Lu previously stated that some of the liquors in their home were purchased gradually since 2006 for entertainment and collection purposes, providing relevant purchase records and other materials.