Full text of the first-instance judgment against renowned artist Gao Shen, sentenced to three years in prison

People’s Court of
Sanhe City, Hebei Province

Criminal Judgment (2025) Ji 1082 Xing Chu No. 296

Public Prosecutor People’s Procuratorate of Sanhe City, Hebei Province.

Defendant Gao Shen, male, Han ethnicity, born on May 10, 1956, in Jinan, Shandong Province, citizen identity number 370105195605102119, technical secondary school education, retired employee of the Jinan Art Museum (Jinan Academy of Fine Arts), household registration at No. 2 Qianfoshan West Road, Lixia District, Jinan City, Shandong Province, address before detention: 7A, Baishi Jingu Yanjiao International Industrial Base (hereinafter collectively referred to as Baishi Jingu Industrial Park), Yanjiao Development Zone, Sanhe City. On August 26, 2024, he was criminally detained by the Sanhe Municipal Public Security Bureau on suspicion of the crime of infringing upon the reputation and honor of heroes and martyrs, and on the same year

he was arrested on September 29. He is currently detained at the Sanhe City Detention Center.

Defense counsel Mo Shaoping, attorney at the Beijing Mo Shaoping Law Firm.

Defense counsel Ma Gangquan, attorney at the Beijing Mo Shaoping Law Firm. 

The People’s Procuratorate of Sanhe City, Hebei Province, charged defendant Gao Shen with the crime of infringing upon the reputation of heroes and martyrs in indictment No. 21 (2025) San Jian Xing Su, and filed a public prosecution with this Court on June 10, 2025. This Court formed a collegial panel in accordance with the law, applied ordinary procedures, and held a pretrial conference on March 24, 2026. Because this case involved personal privacy, the trial was heard in closed court on March 30 of the same year. The People’s Procuratorate of Sanhe City assigned prosecutor Li Yi to appear in court to support the prosecution. Defendant Gao Shen and his defense counsel Mo Shaoping and Ma Gangquan appeared in court to participate in the proceedings.

The case was granted extensions of the trial period by the Langfang Intermediate People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Court. The trial has now concluded.

The People’s Procuratorate of Sanhe City, Hebei Province, alleged that between 2005 and 2009, defendant Gao Shen, harboring resentment toward a former state leader, conspired with others to maliciously create a large number of sculptures in a studio in Beijing’s 798 Art District that distorted and vilified the heroic image of the former state leader, and transported them abroad for exhibition and accepted media interviews under the name “The Gao Brothers.” Thereafter, Gao Shen successively moved the above-mentioned sculptures to Factory 7A in Baishi Jingu Industrial Park, Yanjiao Development Zone, Sanhe City, for storage.

Between 2013 and 2024, in addition to conspiring with others to upload graphic information containing the above-mentioned sculptures to the X platform for online dissemination, defendant Gao Shen authorized others to use photographs of the sculptures as book covers and attended relevant award ceremonies. To date, the relevant information continues to be reposted and disseminated extensively online, seriously harming the reputation of the former state leader and damaging the public interest of society.

Regarding the above facts alleged in the indictment, the public prosecutor read out and presented relevant documentary evidence, witness testimony, the defendant’s statements and other evidence to the court, arguing that defendant Gao Shen harmed the reputation of a hero by creating and disseminating sculptures that distorted and vilified the former state leader, damaged the public interest of society, and that the circumstances were serious and the nature of the conduct particularly egregious. His conduct violated Article 299-1 of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China and should be prosecuted for the criminal responsibility for infringing upon the reputation of heroes and martyrs. It recommended that defendant Gao Shen be sentenced to three years’ imprisonment.

Defendant Gao Shen denied both the criminal facts and the charge alleged in the indictment, arguing that the prototypes of the sculptures involved were not the former state leader, that the sculptures did not distort or vilify anyone, that he did not create the sculptures out of resentment, that he did not authorize others to use photographs of the sculptures involved as book covers, and that he did not upload graphic information containing the sculptures involved to the X platform. His conduct therefore did not constitute the crime of infringing upon the reputation of heroes and martyrs.

Defendant Gao Shen’s defense counsel put forward the following defense opinions:

1. Some of the facts alleged in the indictment are unclear and the evidence is insufficient.

The number of sculptures involved in the indictment is unclear; there is insufficient evidence to establish that defendant Gao Shen uploaded graphic information containing the sculptures involved to the X platform for online dissemination and authorized others to use photographs of the sculptures involved as book covers; there is insufficient evidence to establish that the sculptures involved distorted or vilified the heroic image of the former state leader or damaged the public interest of society; the allegation that the sculptures distorted or vilified the heroic image of the former state leader lacks an objective basis for artistic assessment; defendant Gao Shen stated that the sculptures he created did not specifically refer to the former state leader; and the electronic data obtained by the public security authorities through remote examination is unlawful and cannot be used as evidence.

2. The law was incorrectly applied in this case.

Defendant Gao Shen’s creation of the sculptures involved occurred before the crime of infringing upon the reputation and honor of heroes and martyrs was added as an offense. Even if the conduct constituted a crime, the limitation period for prosecution had already expired, and the act of storing the sculptures involved occurred after the crime had been completed and was not a continuation of the criminal conduct; defendant Gao Shen enjoys a constitutional right to freedom of literary and artistic creation and should not be deemed to have committed a crime; the public prosecutor’s characterization of the alleged distortion and vilification of the former state leader by the sculptures as “infringing upon the reputation of heroes and martyrs by other means” lacks a clear legal basis; the sculptures involved were disseminated only on overseas networks, information on overseas networks was not transmitted into China, no legally protected interest in real-world society was infringed, and the impact of the sculptures was limited to a small circle in the art world and was not criminally harmful, so it should not be deemed a crime.

3. Defendant Gao Shen’s conduct did not reach the legally prescribed standard of serious circumstances. The public prosecutor’s sentencing recommendation was improper.

After trial, the Court found that between 2005 and 2009, defendant Gao Shen, in order to vent personal grievances, conspired with others in a studio at No. 4, Jiuxianqiao Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, in Factory 798 Art District, to create three series of sculptures, including one entitled “Repentance,” deliberately vilifying the image of Chairman Mao Zedong by emphasizing his distinctive features. Between 2010 and 2013, Gao Shen exhibited the above-mentioned sculptures overseas by means including disassembling them for transport abroad or reproducing them overseas. Between 2013 and 2024, Gao Shen conspired with others to continuously promote graphic information containing the above-mentioned sculptures through his overseas X (formerly Twitter) platform account. Between 2023 and 2024, Gao Shen authorized others to use photographs of the sculptures as book covers and attended relevant award ceremonies. To date, graphic information concerning the sculptures involved continues to spread on the internet, causing an adverse impact, seriously infringing upon the reputation of Chairman Mao Zedong and damaging the public interest of society. In 2020, Gao Shen successively transported the above-mentioned sculptures to Factory 7A in Baishi Jingu Industrial Park, Yanjiao Development Zone, Sanhe City, for storage. On August 26, 2024, police officers from the Sanhe Municipal Public Security Bureau apprehended Gao Shen at that location and brought him into custody.

The above facts are established by the following evidence, which was presented, examined and challenged in court and confirmed by this Court:

1. Witness testimony

(1) The testimony of witness Zhao Yaliang (Gao Shen’s former wife) established that the sculptures involved were jointly created by Gao Shen and Gao Qiang, that 7A, Baishi Jingu Industrial Park, Yanjiao Development Zone, was jointly funded and purchased by Gao Qiang and Gao Shen, and that Gao Shen attended a banquet and spoke abroad.

(2) The testimony of witnesses Gao Xin (Gao Shen’s third elder brother) and Gao An (Gao Shen’s second elder brother) established the reasons Gao Shen created the sculptures involved and Gao Shen’s work history.

2. Gao Shen’s personal personnel file, a certification issued by the Jinan Art Museum (Jinan Academy of Fine Arts), an explanation regarding the payment of Gao Shen’s retirement pension, and Gao Shen’s bank card transaction records established that Gao Shen was a retired employee of the Jinan Art Museum (Jinan Academy of Fine Arts), as well as his family circumstances, work history and participation in overseas exhibitions.

3. Lease materials for the premises at No. 4, Jiuxianqiao Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing; an explanation regarding the purchase of 7A, Baishi Jingu Industrial Park; the contract for Factory 7A, Baishi Jingu Industrial Park, and related materials; relevant materials from Sanhe Ruiyi Trading Co., Ltd.; the domestic-funded enterprise registration form; a location diagram for 7A, Baishi Jingu Industrial Park; and on-site photographs established that Gao Shen leased a studio in Factory 798 Art District at No. 4, Jiuxianqiao Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing; that Gao Shen and his younger brother Gao Qiang jointly paid for the purchase of 7A, Baishi Jingu Industrial Park; that they registered and established Sanhe Ruiyi Trading Co., Ltd. there as its domicile; and that the sculptures involved were stored there.

4. Search warrant, search record, decision on seizure, seizure list, photographs of seized items, decision on sealing, sealing list and statement of circumstances issued by the Sanhe Municipal Public Security Bureau established that the Sanhe Municipal Public Security Bureau searched 7A, Baishi Jingu Industrial Park, Yanjiao Development Zone, Sanhe City, and Room 101, Unit 3, Building 1, No. 28 Jingshi 11th Road, Lixia District, Jinan City, Shandong Province, and lawfully seized the sculptures involved, books containing photographs of the sculptures involved and other items.

5. The electronic-data on-site extraction record, electronic-data preservation list, screenshots of remotely preserved evidence, statements issued by the Sanhe Municipal Public Security Bureau regarding the remote extraction and preservation of online evidence, and a statement regarding the remote extraction of internet electronic data during supplemental investigation established the browsing of graphic information concerning the sculptures involved on the X platform, the browsing of graphic information posted by the account involved in Gao Shen’s case, the dissemination of photographs of the sculptures involved on overseas networks, the overseas exhibition of the sculptures involved, and the use of photographs of the sculptures involved in relevant books.

6. Video of Gao Shen attending an award ceremony established the process by which, in February 2024, Gao Shen attended an overseas award ceremony for photographs of the sculptures involved, received the award and delivered an acceptance speech.

7. Gao Shen’s entry and exit records established his entry into and exit from the country between April 25, 2006, and June 6, 2024, corroborating his participation in exhibitions.

8. The engagement letter for the appraisal, the electronic evidence inspection report of the Langfang Municipal Public Security Bureau’s Evidence Identification Institute, the notice of appraisal opinion, screenshots of preserved mobile-phone evidence, and a statement issued by the Sanhe Municipal Public Security Bureau regarding the contents of optical discs and hard drives transferred with the case established that photographs of the sculptures involved were extracted from Gao Shen’s mobile hard drives, optical discs and other storage devices; chat records between Gao Shen and Rong Wei extracted from Gao Shen’s mobile phone corroborated the facts that Gao Shen authorized others to use photographs of the sculptures involved as book covers and attended an award ceremony for photographs of the sculptures involved.

9. A reply from Beijing Douyin Technology Co., Ltd.; a response letter from Beijing Weimeng Chuangke Network Technology Co., Ltd. regarding the case of “Gao Shen infringing upon the reputation and honor of heroes and martyrs”; information on Gao Shen’s Douyin and Xiaohongshu platform accounts; and a statement issued by the Sanhe Municipal Public Security Bureau established that the phone number registered for Gao Shen’s Douyin and Xiaohongshu platform accounts was a phone number used by Gao Shen, and that some photographs posted by the Douyin platform account were identical to those posted by the account involved on the X platform.

10. The case registration form and decision to open a case established that on August 17, 2024, the Sanhe Municipal Public Security Bureau received a transferred case lead and opened a criminal case against Gao Shen that day on suspicion of infringing upon the reputation and honor of heroes and martyrs.

11. The apprehension record established that on August 26, 2024, police officers from the Sanhe Municipal Public Security Bureau apprehended Gao Shen at 7A, Baishi Jingu Industrial Park, Yanjiao Development Zone, Sanhe City, and brought him into custody.

12. A statement on the inquiry into illegal and criminal records established that Gao Shen had no criminal record.

13. National population basic information and household registration information established Gao Shen’s identity.

14. Defendant Gao’s statements during the investigation established his family circumstances and the process of creating the sculptures involved, confirmed that the prototypes of the sculptures involved were people played by a particular special-type actor, and described the participation of the sculptures involved in overseas exhibitions, his media interviews and his use of an X platform account.

The identification record and identification photographs established that Gao Shen identified the sculptures involved.

Defense counsel for defendant Gao Shen presented the following evidence materials in court:

1. Rong Wei’s written certification, consular certification, Chinese translation and mailed express envelope. Intended to prove that Gao Shen did not authorize others to use photographs of the sculptures involved as book covers.

2. Written opinions issued by Daozi and others, a written opinion issued by Zhu Qi, a written opinion issued by Liu Peng, and mailed express envelopes. Intended to prove that, from the professional perspective of artists, the sculptures involved did not distort or vilify the former state leader.

3. A statement posted by Gao Qiang on the X platform and a record of remote extraction of electronic data. Intended to prove that Gao Shen did not disseminate graphic information containing the sculptures involved on the X platform.

Upon examination, the written certification from Rong Wei provided by defense counsel conflicted with other evidence in the case, and the objective nature and authenticity of its contents were difficult to verify; the written materials issued by Daozi, Liu Peng, Zhu Qi and others were commentaries and did not conform to the forms of evidence prescribed by the Criminal Procedure Law; the statement posted by Gao Qiang on the X platform conflicted with the electronic data, appraisal opinions and other evidence in this case and could not be verified. Accordingly, this Court does not accept the above evidence submitted by defense counsel in accordance with the law.

Regarding the explanations and defense opinions put forward by defendant Gao Shen and his defense counsel, based on the facts and evidence established at trial and in accordance with the law, this Court makes the following comprehensive assessment:

1. Regarding whether the sculptures involved distorted or vilified the image of Chairman Mao Zedong and the issue of quantity. Upon examination, based on the photographs of seized items and identification photographs, the appearance and form of the sculptures involved contained image elements and distinctive features of Chairman Mao Zedong and were sufficient to identify and point to Chairman Mao Zedong. Based on defendant Gao’s statements, the testimony of witnesses Gao Xin and Gao An, photographs showing the placement of the sculptures involved when exhibited overseas, the themes of books using photographs of the sculptures as covers, Gao’s acceptance speech at an award ceremony and other evidence, it was sufficient to establish that the sculptures involved seriously distorted and vilified the image of Chairman Mao Zedong. Gao Shen’s argument that the prototypes of the sculptures were the actors themselves is inconsistent with the facts established, and this Court does not accept it. It was also established that the sculptures involved comprised three series, with a large quantity of finished and semi-finished products. In conjunction with the evidence in the case, this was sufficient to establish the facts alleged in the indictment. Therefore, this Court does not accept the defense opinion that the quantity of sculptures involved in the indictment was unclear.

2. Regarding whether defendant Gao Shen uploaded graphic information containing the sculptures involved to the X platform for online dissemination and the legality of the relevant electronic data. Upon examination, the electronic-data on-site extraction record, preservation list, screenshots of remotely preserved evidence and other evidence were obtained online by the investigative authorities in accordance with the law. The evidence-extraction procedure was lawful and its contents objective and authentic. This Court therefore does not accept the defense opinion that the electronic data obtained by the public security authorities through remote examination was unlawful and could not be used as evidence. Electronic data, electronic evidence, inspection reports and other evidence established that some content posted on the X platform account on February 17, 2021, and October 23, 2022, was identical to some content previously posted by Gao

on the Douyin and Xiaohongshu platforms, and that Gao Shen could freely log in to and use the X platform account. On May 1, 2023, the X platform account posted content containing photographs of the sculptures involved, which was identical to content posted on Gao’s WeChat platform; information extracted from devices including the mobile phone and hard drives used by Gao also corresponded to information posted by the X platform account. Accordingly, the existing evidence was sufficient to establish that defendant Gao Shen uploaded graphic information containing the sculptures involved to the X platform for online dissemination. This Court does not accept Gao Shen’s explanation that he did not upload graphic information containing the sculptures involved to the X platform or the defense opinion that there was insufficient evidence to establish that Gao Shen uploaded such graphic information to the X platform for online dissemination.

3. Regarding whether defendant Gao Shen authorized others to use photographs of the sculptures involved as book covers. Upon examination, the chat records between Gao Shen and Rong Wei and the video establishing Gao Shen’s attendance at an award ceremony showed that Gao Shen expressed approval of Rong Wei’s use of photographs of the sculptures involved as book covers. He also attended the relevant award ceremony in February 2024, received the award certificate and delivered an acceptance speech. This was sufficient to establish that Gao Shen authorized others to use photographs of the sculptures involved as book covers. This Court does not accept the relevant explanation or defense opinion.

4. Regarding whether defendant Gao Shen committed the crime of infringing upon the reputation of heroes and martyrs

Upon examination, since the Criminal Law Amendment (XI) of the People’s Republic of China came into force, Gao Shen uploaded graphic information containing the sculptures involved to the X platform and authorized others to use photographs of the sculptures involved as book covers. His creation and dissemination of the sculptures involved were continuous and constituted a continuation of the criminal conduct. Therefore, this Court does not accept the defense opinion that the limitation period for prosecution in this case had expired. As of August 21, 2024, content containing photographs of the sculptures involved on Gao Shen’s X platform account had received 46 comments, 178 reposts and 485 likes; as of September 17, 2024, the total number of views of photographs and videos of the sculptures involved on the X and YouTube platforms was 3,099; between March 1, 2021, and August 25, 2024, photographs of the sculptures involved had been disseminated on a total of 227 websites. The content, means and effects of Gao Shen’s dissemination of graphic information concerning the sculptures involved were sufficient to infringe upon the reputation of Chairman Mao Zedong. The sculptures’ information was disseminated widely and for a long period, had an adverse social impact and damaged the public interest of society. The circumstances were serious and met the requirements of Article 299-1 of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China and Article 2 of the Opinions of the Supreme People’s Court, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate and the Ministry of Public Security on Punishing, in Accordance with the Law, Illegal and Criminal Acts Infringing upon the Reputation and Honor of Heroes and Martyrs. Defendant Gao Shen’s conduct constituted the crime of infringing upon the reputation of heroes and martyrs. In addition, defendant Gao Shen created sculptures that distorted and vilified the image of Chairman Mao Zedong and disseminated them. Gao Shen’s creative conduct exceeded the normal scope of art. Accordingly, this Court does not accept the relevant opinions of Gao Shen and his defense counsel.

This Court holds that defendant Gao Shen insulted a hero by creating sculptures that vilified and distorted him, and disseminated graphic information about the sculptures, thereby infringing upon the hero’s reputation and damaging the public interest of society. His conduct continued for a long period, the information was disseminated widely, and the circumstances were serious. His conduct constituted the crime of infringing upon the reputation of heroes and martyrs. The charge brought by the public prosecutor is established, and this Court supports it.

Defendant Gao Shen’s criminal conduct had an extremely adverse social impact. The public prosecutor’s sentencing recommendation was appropriate, and this Court accepts it. In conclusion, based on the facts, nature and circumstances of defendant Gao Shen’s crime and the degree of harm caused to society, and pursuant to Articles 299-1, 61, 45, 47 and 64 of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China, the judgment is as follows:

1. Defendant Gao Shen is found guilty of infringing upon the reputation of heroes and martyrs and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment. (The sentence shall be calculated from the date on which the judgment is executed. One day of detention before execution of the judgment shall count as one day of the sentence, namely from August 26, 2024, through August 25, 2027.)

2. Contraband seized in the case and the defendant’s personal property used in the commission of the crime shall be confiscated in accordance with the law; other items seized in the case shall be handled by the seizure authority in accordance with the law.

If dissatisfied with this judgment, an appeal may be filed within 10 days from the second day after receiving the judgment, through this Court or directly with the Langfang Intermediate People’s Court of Hebei Province. For a written appeal, one original and five copies of the appeal petition shall be submitted.

Presiding Judge Shi Shaolin

Judge
Yang Feng

Judge
Zhou Tianlong

People’s Court of Sanhe City

August 21, 2026

Compared with the original, this copy is identical

Judge’s Assistant  Yang Sen

Clerk  Jing Xuerong