Millions of yuan (RMB) deposited in a bank were embezzled by bank employees, but reclaiming the deposit has proven to be extremely difficult for the account holder. The bank is insisting that the account holder “wait for a judicial conclusion,” but what exactly does that entail? Can the account holder endure the waiting period?
According to reports from mainland Chinese media on April 29th, Ms. Chen Bing, the owner of a company in Jilin Province with hundreds of employees, deposited 10 million yuan of the company’s reserve funds into the Fuyu Minzhong Town Bank in Fuyu City, Jilin Province on October 28th last year.
Over a month later, when Ms. Chen planned to use the funds, she found that she couldn’t log into mobile banking. Upon inquiring at the branch, she discovered that there was only a little over 10,000 yuan left in her account, leaving Ms. Chen in shock.
At Ms. Chen’s request, the bank retrieved transaction records and found that shortly after she made the deposit, her bank card was reported lost on December 13th. A new card was issued that same day, and the individual then informed the bank to redeem the 10 million yuan. Subsequently, this substantial sum was transferred to a person named “Zhao Li.”
Ms. Chen stated that “Zhao Li” was an employee of the bank she dealt with, who originally helped her with her bank card. This was a case of an inside job where a bank employee had committed theft.
She further revealed that she knew Zhao Li personally, having been introduced by a friend in 2023. Over the years, Zhao Li repeatedly persuaded Ms. Chen to deposit money into the bank where Zhao Li worked. Consequently, over the years, there were numerous deposits totaling around 100 million yuan in transactions.
Previously, Ms. Chen had directly transferred funds to Zhao Li’s bank account; although the principal and interest were regularly credited, she had reservations and subsequently obtained a bank card in her own name. To her dismay, when she attempted to deposit a large sum for the first time at the counter, it was all stolen. “Closing the account, getting a new card, all the places that required my signature were forged by her,” Ms. Chen explained.
Upon discovering the theft, Ms. Chen contacted Zhao Li directly, who admitted to the embezzlement, promising to withdraw the funds from the stock market and repay her promptly. However, after waiting for over ten days, Zhao Li failed to fulfill her promise.
Left with no choice, Ms. Chen turned to the bank involved, but the bank’s manager was reluctant to intervene. In frustration, Ms. Chen stated, “My money was deposited at the counter, and what the employee stole belonged to the bank. I demand the bank to reimburse me.”
Several days later, the situation shifted as the Fuyu Minzhong Town Bank merged with the Jilin Agricultural and Commercial Bank in December of the previous year. Therefore, in early 2026, Ms. Chen traveled to Changchun, the capital of Jilin Province, to report the incident to the head office of the Jilin Agricultural and Commercial Bank.
The staff at the head office pledged that Zhao Li would return the money to her account within seven days. However, even after seven days, Ms. Chen had not received her deposit, but instead received news of Zhao Li’s attempted suicide.
It turned out that Zhao Li owed money to several people who were demanding repayment, leading her to consume pesticide under pressure. Although Zhao Li survived after being rescued and was out of critical condition, she was taken into custody by the police. Currently, public security organs have opened a case against Zhao Li for the crimes of illegally absorbing public deposits and misappropriation of duties, with prosecutorial approval for her arrest, and the case has entered judicial proceedings. Consequently, the likelihood of retrieving the deposit from Zhao Li is now slim.
On March 13th, a bank employee involved in the incident disclosed to Ms. Chen that following an investigation, the bank acknowledged the employee’s misconduct and management negligence, agreeing to her demand for the return of the deposit. However, there was no definitive timeline for when the deposit could be reimbursed. Three days later, another bank employee stated that they needed to await a “judicial conclusion” before addressing the deposit issue accordingly.
Ms. Chen reiterated the matter to the head office of the Jilin Agricultural and Commercial Bank, where staff provided a similar response, indicating, “This matter cannot be resolved internally; you must await a judicial conclusion.” But what exactly constitutes a “judicial conclusion”?
On the afternoon of March 17th, Ms. Chen visited the Jilin Supervision Bureau of the China Banking Regulatory Commission to report the situation. Staff members informed her that the incident had been included in the financial illegal clues identification procedure, yet the regulatory authority could only coordinate supervision and could not compel the bank to make an immediate compensation.
Several months have passed since the incident, and with the deposit still unrecovered, Ms. Chen is plagued by insomnia and anxiety daily. Not only is she on the brink of a breakdown, but her company is also facing a severe crisis.
Following the exposure of the incident, an article titled “Bank, Please Put Away Your Arrogance” was published on Sina.com. The piece emphasized that when depositors entrust their money to a bank, it forms a contractual relationship between the depositor and the bank, rather than a personal relationship with bank employees. If an employee embezzles funds, it signifies internal management issues and oversight failures at the bank, and depositors should not bear the consequences. Regardless of how much Zhao Li misappropriated, the rights violated belonged to the bank, and depositors have the right to demand the bank fulfill its obligation to return the funds under the savings contract, without having to await a court judgment.