{"id":"court_ctb_2627_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2627,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"UNKNOWN","filed_date":null,"title":"B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15) | ADVERSARY PROCEEDING COVER SHEET
(Instructions on Reverse)","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"#### **B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15)**\n\n| ADVERSARY PROCEEDING COVER SHEET
(Instructions on Reverse) | | ADVERSARY PROCEEDING NUMBER
(Court Use Only) | | | | |\n|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--|\n| PLAINTIFFS | DEFENDANTS | | | | | |\n| Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee | Hugga LLC | | | | | |\n| ATTORNEYS (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone No.) | ATTORNEYS | (If Known) | | | | |\n| Douglas S. Skalka, Patrick R. Linsey
Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.
195 Church St. 13th Floor New Haven, CT 06510
(203)781-2847 | | | | | | |\n| PARTY (Check One Box Only) | | PARTY (Check One Box Only) | | | | |\n| □ Debtor
□ U.S.
Trustee/Bankruptcy Admin | □ Debtor
□ U.S. Trustee/Bankruptcy
Admin | | | | | |\n| □ Creditor
□ Other | □ Creditor | □ Other | | | | |\n| □ Trustee | □ Trustee | | | | | |\n| CAUSE OF ACTION
(WRITE A BRIEF STATEMENT OF CAUSE OF ACTION, INCLUDING ALL U.S. STATUTES INVOLVED)
Complaint of Chapter 11 Trustee seeking avoidance and recovery of fraudulent transfers, and related relief pursuant
to Bankruptcy Code Sections 544,548, and 550 and New York Debtor and Creditor Law Sections 273, 274, and 276 | | | | | | |\n| | | | | | | |\n| NATURE OF SUIT
(Number up to five (5) boxes starting with lead cause of action as 1, first alternative cause as 2, second alternative cause as 3, etc.) | | | | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(1) – Recovery of Money/Property | | FRBP 7001(6) – Dischargeability (continued) | | | | |\n| □
11-Recovery of money/property - §542 turnover of property | □
61-Dischargeability - §523(a)(5), domestic support | | | | | |\n| □
12-Recovery of money/property - §547 preference
□ | □
68-Dischargeability - §523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury | | | | | |\n| 13-Recovery of money/property - §548 fraudulent transfer
□ | □
63-Dischargeability - §523(a)(8), student loan
□ | | | | | |\n| 14-Recovery of money/property - other | | 64-Dischargeability - §523(a)(15), divorce or separation obligation | | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(2) – Validity, Priority or Extent of Lien | □ | (other than domestic support) | | | | |\n| □
21-Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property | | 65-Dischargeability - other | | | | |\n| | | FRBP 7001(7) – Injunctive Relief | | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(3) – Approval of Sale of Property
□ | □
71-Injunctive relief – imposition of stay | | | | | |\n| 31-Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - §363(h) | □ | 72-Injunctive relief – other | | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(4) – Objection/Revocation of Discharge | | FRBP 7001(8) Subordination of Claim or Interest | | | | |\n| □
41-Objection / revocation of discharge - §727(c),(d),(e) | □ | 81-Subordination of claim or interest | | | | |\n| | | | | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(5) – Revocation of Confirmation
□
51-Revocation of confirmation | | FRBP 7001(9) Declaratory Judgment | | | | |\n| | □ | 91-Declaratory judgment | | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(6) – Dischargeability | | FRBP 7001(10) Determination of Removed Action | | | | |\n| □
66-Dischargeability - §523(a)(1),(14),(14A) priority tax claims | □ | 01-Determination of removed claim or cause | | | | |\n| □
62-Dischargeability - §523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation, | | | | | | |\n| actual fraud
□ | Other
□ | | | | | |\n| 67-Dischargeability - §523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny | □ | SS-SIPA Case – 15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq. | | | | |\n| (continued next column) | | 02-Other (e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court | | | | |\n| | | if unrelated to bankruptcy case) | | | | |\n| □ Check if this case involves a substantive issue of state law | | □ Check if this is asserted to be a class action under FRCP 23 | | | | |\n| □ Check if a jury trial is demanded in complaint | Demand \\$ | | | | | |\n| Other Relief Sought | | | | | | |\n| | | | | | | |\n\n**B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15)**\n\n| BANKRUPTCY CASE IN WHICH THIS ADVERSARY PROCEEDING ARISES | | | | | | |\n|-----------------------------------------------------------|-----------|---------------------------------------|------------------|--|--|--|\n| NAME OF DEBTOR | | BANKRUPTCY CASE NO. | | | | |\n| Ho Wan Kwok | | 22-50073 (JAM) | | | | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH CASE IS PENDING | | DIVISION OFFICE | NAME OF JUDGE | | | |\n| Connecticut | | Bridgeport | Julie A. Manning | | | |\n| RELATED ADVERSARY PROCEEDING (IF ANY) | | | | | | |\n| PLAINTIFF | DEFENDANT | | ADVERSARY | | | |\n| | | | PROCEEDING NO. | | | |\n| | | | | | | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH ADVERSARY IS PENDING | | DIVISION OFFICE | NAME OF JUDGE | | | |\n| | | | | | | |\n| SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF) | | | | | | |\n| | | | | | | |\n| /s/ Douglas Skalka | | | | | | |\n| | | | | | | |\n| | | | | | | |\n| DATE | | PRINT NAME OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF) | | | | |\n| | | | | | | |\n| February 10, 2024 | | Douglas Skalka | | | | |\n| | | | | | | |\n\n#### **INSTRUCTIONS**\n\nThe filing of a bankruptcy case creates an \"estate\" under the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court which consists of all of the property of the debtor, wherever that property is located. Because the bankruptcy estate is so extensive and the jurisdiction of the court so broad, there may be lawsuits over the property or property rights of the estate. There also may be lawsuits concerning the debtor's discharge. If such a lawsuit is filed in a bankruptcy court, it is called an adversary proceeding.\n\nA party filing an adversary proceeding must also must complete and file Form 1040, the Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet, unless the party files the adversary proceeding electronically through the court's Case Management/Electronic Case Filing system (CM/ECF). (CM/ECF captures the information on Form 1040 as part of the filing process.) When completed, the cover sheet summarizes basic information on the adversary proceeding. The clerk of court needs the information to process the adversary proceeding and prepare required statistical reports on court activity.\n\nThe cover sheet and the information contained on it do not replace or supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, the Bankruptcy Rules, or the local rules of court. The cover sheet, which is largely selfexplanatory, must be completed by the plaintiff's attorney (or by the plaintiff if the plaintiff is not represented by an attorney). A separate cover sheet must be submitted to the clerk for each complaint filed.\n\n**Plaintiffs** and **Defendants.** Give the names of the plaintiffs and defendants exactly as they appear on the complaint.\n\n**Attorneys.** Give the names and addresses of the attorneys, if known.\n\n**Party**. Check the most appropriate box in the first column for the plaintiffs and the second column for the defendants.\n\n**Demand.** Enter the dollar amount being demanded in the complaint.\n\n**Signature.** This cover sheet must be signed by the attorney of record in the box on the second page of the form. If the plaintiff is represented by a law firm, a member of the firm must sign. If the plaintiff is pro se, that is, not represented by an attorney, the plaintiff must sign.\n\n# **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | | x |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| In re: | | :
:
Chapter 11 |\n| 1
HO WAN KWOK,
et al., | | :
:
Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| | Debtors. | :
:
(Jointly Administered)
: |\n| -----------------------------------------------------------
LUC A. DESPINS, CHAPTER 11
TRUSTEE,
v. | Plaintiff, | x
:
:
:
:
Adv. Proceeding No. [
]
:
: |\n| | | :
:
February
10,
2024 |\n| HUGGA LLC, | | :
:
: |\n| | Defendant. | :
x |\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | | |\n\n# **COMPLAINT OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE SEEKING AVOIDANCE AND RECOVERY OF FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS AND RELATED RELIEF PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY CODE SECTIONS 544, 548, AND 550 AND NEW YORK DEBTOR & CREDITOR LAW SECTIONS 273, 274, AND 276**\n\nLuc A. Despins, in his capacity as the chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") appointed in the\n\nchapter 11 case (the \"Chapter 11 Case\") of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\" or \"Kwok\"), files this\n\n1 The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases are Ho Wan Kwok (also known as Guo Wengui, Miles Guo, and Miles Kwok, as well as numerous other aliases) (last four digits of tax identification number: 9595), Genever Holdings LLC (last four digits of tax identification number: 8202) and Genever Holdings Corporation. The mailing address for the Trustee, Genever Holdings LLC, and the Genever Holdings Corporation is Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166 c/o Luc A. Despins, as Trustee for the Estate of Ho Wan Kwok (solely for purposes of notices and communications).\n\nadversary complaint (the \"Complaint\") against defendant Hugga LLC (the \"Defendant\"), stating as follows:\n\n### **NATURE OF ACTION**\n\n1. The Trustee commences this adversary proceeding to avoid and recover transfers of the Debtor's property prior to the commencement of this Chapter 11 Case.\n\n2. The Debtor, through his alter ego shell company, G Fashion (\"G Fashion\"), transferred funds in the amount of \\$472,166.63 prior to the Petition Date (as defined herein) to the Defendant as initial transferee.\n\n3. These transfers were actually fraudulent, because the Debtor effectuated them as part of his \"shell game,\" and they were made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors. Alternatively, these transfers were constructively fraudulent, because they were made when the Debtor was insolvent, and the Debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value in consideration thereof.\n\n#### **JURISDICTION AND VENUE**\n\n4. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this adversary proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1334(b).\n\n5. This adversary proceeding has been referred to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §157(a).\n\n6. The statutory predicates for the relief sought herein include sections 544, 548 and 550 of Title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\") and New York Debtor & Creditor Law sections 273, 274, and 276 2 or any other applicable state law equivalents.\n\n2 All statutory references to New York Debtor and Creditor Law will hereinafter be referred to as \"N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law\". The New York Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (\"NYUVT\") replaced the New York Uniform\n\n#### **THE PARTIES**\n\n7. The Trustee is the chapter 11 trustee in the Chapter 11 Case pursuant to the Bankruptcy Court's order entered on July 8, 2022 [Case No. 22-50073 (the \"Main Case\") Docket No. 523].\n\n8. The Defendant is a California limited liability company with an address at 8948 Burton Way, Beverly Hills, California 90211.\n\n#### **FACTS**\n\n#### **A. Chapter 11 Case**\n\n9. The Debtor filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\") on February 15, 2022 (the \"Petition Date\") in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut (the \"Court\" or \"Bankruptcy Court\"), thus commencing the above-captioned chapter 11 case (the \"Chapter 11 Case\").\n\n10. On March 21, 2002, the Office of the United States Trustee appointed an Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in this Chapter 11 Case. No examiner has been appointed.\n\n11. The Debtor's bankruptcy schedules, filed in March 2022 with the Bankruptcy Court, claimed that he owned \\$3,850 in assets and had incurred hundreds of millions of dollars of liabilities.3 While the Debtor was, indeed, deeply indebted, his schedules failed to disclose the Debtor's property as held and transferred through his many alter-ego shell companies, including Lexington.\n\nFraudulent Conveyance Act (\"NYUFC\") and became effective on April 4, 2020 and applies to transfers made or obligations incurred on or after April 4, 2020.\n\n3 Schedule of Assets and Liabilities, at 1 (Main Case, Docket No. 78).\n\n12. On June 15, 2022, the Court entered a memorandum of decision and order [Main Case Docket No. 465] directing the United States Trustee to appoint a chapter 11 trustee in the Chapter 11 Case. Pursuant to this order, the United States Trustee selected Luc A. Despins as the Trustee. On July 8, 2022, the Court entered an order granting the appointment of Luc A. Despins as the Trustee in the Chapter 11 Case [Main Case Docket No. 523].\n\n### **B. Debtor's Use of Shell Companies and Trustee's Adversary Proceedings**\n\n13. Lexington is one of the numerous alter-ego shell companies used by the Debtor to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors. 4 For years, the Debtor has orchestrated a \"shell game,\" employing a convoluted web of shell companies, nominally owned by family members and/or known subordinates, but in reality, controlled by the Debtor. This shell game enabled the Debtor to use and spend and/or transfer millions of dollars of cash and other assets while concealing his property from creditors.\n\n14. Since his appointment, the Trustee has commenced a number of adversary proceedings in the Chapter 11 Case to, among other things, establish that the Debtor's shell companies were his alter-egos and/or that such companies and their assets were equitably owned by the Debtor and in several the Bankruptcy Court has already granted such relief.5\n\n4 The Trustee has or will imminently commence an adversary proceeding against G Fashion, which adversary proceeding seeks, among other things, a declaratory judgment that G Fashion was the alter ego of the Debtor. The Trustee incorporates by reference herein, the Trustee's Complaint filed in such adversary proceeding.\n\n5 These include the following adversary proceedings: (i) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC, et al.* [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05003]; (ii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Greenwich Land LLC, et al.* [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05005]; (iii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Mei Guo* [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05008]; (iv) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HCHK Technologies, Inc., et al.* [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05013]; (v) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Taurus Fund LLC, et al.* [Adv. Proc. No. 23- 05017]; (vi) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited* [Adv. Proc. 23-05018]; and (vii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Lamp Capital LLC, et al.* [Adv. Proc. 23-05023].\n\n15. The fact patterns in these litigations consistently involve: (i) Debtor-controlled shell companies held by close family members and/or subordinates, (ii) assets purchased with cash from other Debtor-controlled entities and/or transferred to and among shell entities for no consideration, and (iii) the Debtor benefiting from and having control and dominion over such assets.\n\n### **C. Debtor's Conduct to Hinder, Delay and/or Defraud Creditors**\n\n16. In addition to the matters addressed in the Trustee's adversary proceedings, the Bankruptcy Court has found that the Debtor was the beneficial owner of Ace Decade Limited (and through it, Dawn State Limited) and that the Debtor controlled and employed Ace Decade Limited's nominee shareholder, Yvette Wang.6\n\n17. The Bankruptcy Court has also found that the \"G Entities\" (Gettr, G Fashion, G Music, GClubs, GNews and GEdu), the New Federal State of China and the Rule of Law Foundation, as well as other purportedly independent entities and organizations, were controlled by the Debtor7 , led by the Debtor8 and/or served \"the purposes of… and as business vehicles of\" the Debtor.9\n\n18. Prior to the Petition Date, Judge Liman of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York found that Eastern Profit Corporation Limited, an entity originally\n\n6 *Order Granting Motion to Hold Debtor in Contempt of Corporate Governance Order,* para.1, 4 (Jan. 24, 2023, Docket No. 1372 (\"Corp. Governance Contempt Order\").\n\n7 *Corrected Memorandum of Decision Granting in Part Motion for Preliminary Injunction*, para. 3 (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05032, January 13, 2023 (\"The Debtor also controls Saraca Media Group and a related entity 'GTV'\").\n\n8 *Id*. at para. 7 (\"The Debtor is the leader of The Whistleblower Movement, NFSC, ROLF and Himalaya.\").\n\n9 *Id*. (\"The Whistleblower Movement, NFSC, ROLF, GSeries, and Himalaya serve the purposes of the Debtor, serve as business vehicles for the Debtor, and their members are personally loyal to the Debtor.\").\n\nowned by one of Debtor's chauffeurs before its transfer to Debtor's daughter, was \"in essence, a shell corporation\" for the Debtor.10\n\n19. The Debtor has gone to great lengths to hinder and delay the collection efforts of one of his largest creditors, *i.e.*, Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, L.P. (\"PAX\"). In 2017, PAX sued the Debtor in the Supreme Court of the State of New York (the \"New York Court\"), Index No. 652077/2017 (the \"PAX Case\"), seeking judgment for monies owed. On February 3, 2021, PAX obtained a judgment from the New York Court against the Debtor in the sum of \\$116,402,019.57 (the \"PAX Judgment\"). PAX sought to enforce the PAX Judgment by levying the Debtor's assets—including the Lady May, which the Debtor falsely claimed was owned by his daughter, and the Debtor's luxury apartment in Manhattan, which the Debtor falsely claimed was held in trust for the Debtor's son. The Debtor's defiance of New York Court orders in postjudgment proceedings eventually resulted in the Debtor incurring contempt penalties of \\$134 million.\n\n20. The Debtor also used his alter egos, including G Fashion, as personal piggy-banks, funding the lavish lifestyle to which he and his family had become accustomed, while concealing assets in these alter egos from his creditors and hindering and delaying creditors from recoveries on their claims. The transfers that the Debtor effectuated through these alter egos perpetuated the Debtor's fraudulent scheme.\n\n10 *Eastern Profit Corp. Ltd. v. Strategic Vision US LLC*, No. 18-CV-2185 (LJL) 2021 WL 2554631, at \\*1 (S.D.N.Y. June 22, 2021).\n\n21. The Debtor has testified before the Bankruptcy Court that he has insufficient assets to pay his liabilities and that his luxurious lifestyle is funded by his family through businesses nominally held by family members. 11 The Debtor scheduled only \\$3,850 in assets.12\n\n22. In March 2023, the Debtor was arrested and remains confined pending his on federal criminal charges of, among other things, wire fraud, securities fraud, and money laundering.\n\n23. In its criminal indictment of the Debtor, the United States Government asserts that the Debtor and his co-defendants \"utilized more than approximately 500 accounts held in the names of *at least 80 different entities or individuals* to launder more than \\$1 billion in fraud proceeds.\"13\n\n24. The property of the Debtor's alter egos, including G Fashion, was at all times prior to the Petition Date property of the Debtor.\n\n25. At all times relevant herein, the Debtor conducted business in New York, New York, including direction of the Transfers.\n\n### **D. Transfers Made with Intent to Hinder, Delay, or Defraud Creditors**\n\n26. The Transfers at issue in this Complaint were made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors inasmuch as they were all made through the Debtor's alterego shell companies operated as a part of the Debtor's shell game.\n\n11 Hearing on Debtor's Motion for Entry of Interim and Final DIP Orders (I) Authorizing the Debtor to Obtain Unsecured, Subordinated Postpetition Financing and (II) Scheduling Interim and Final Hearings, and (III) Granting Related Relief (Main Case, April 27, 2022)\n\n12 *See* n.4\n\n13 See Memorandum of Law of the United States of America in Opposition to Defendant Yanping Wang's Motion for Pretrial Release at 29, attached as Exhibit B in the Reply of Chapter 11 Trustee to G Club Operations LLC's Supplemental Objection to Trustee's Motion to Compel and Request for Related Relief (June 23, 2023, Main Case Docket No. 1934).\n\n27. The Debtor intentionally orchestrated his financial affairs in this manner in order to conceal and dissipate millions of dollars in assets while falsely pleading poverty to his many creditors. The Debtor claimed to be destitute while simultaneously spending heavily to maintain a billionaire lifestyle for himself and for his family members and close associates.\n\n28. The assets concealed and dissipated by the Debtor included funds that he obtained from the victims of his cryptocurrency, securities, and other fraud schemes. As a result of this conduct, the Debtor faces multiple felony fraud, money laundering, and racketeering charges in a criminal case pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. *See United States v. Ho Wan Kwok*, case no. 1:23-cr-00118-AT [ECF No. 215] (Jan. 3, 2024 S.D.N.Y.).\n\n29. The Debtor knew and intended that by concealing and dissipating his assets in this manner there would not be sufficient assets remaining to repay his creditors—including the many victims of his frauds. These transfers were thus necessarily made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors.\n\n#### **E. Transfers to the Defendant**\n\n30. Prior to the Petition Date, the Debtor, through shell companies including G Fashion, or otherwise, transferred the Debtor's property to the Defendant (collectively, the \"Transfers\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **SCHEDULE A** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n31. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor had outstanding obligations to creditors of the Debtor's estate.\n\n32. The Defendant was the initial transferee of the Transfers.\n\n### **FIRST CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code §§ 548(a)(1)(A) and 550(a))**\n\n33. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-32 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n34. The Transfers were made by the Debtor through his alter ego, G Fashion, with the actual intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n- 35. The Debtor's intent to hinder, delay, or and/or defraud his creditors in effectuating the Transfers is shown by, among other things:\n\t- a. The Transfers were effectuated using an alter-ego shell company;\n\t- b. The Transfers were concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n\t- c. The Transfers were effectuated as part of the Debtor's \"shell game\" with\n\nthe aid of the Debtor's family members and other lieutenants and subordinates that he controlled in an effort to conceal and shield assets;\n\nd. The Transfers furthered the Debtor's fraudulent conduct by enabling the Debtor to benefit from his fraud without subjecting his property to the reach of his creditors;\n\ne. The Transfers furthered the Debtor's fraudulent conduct by enabling the Debtor to profit from his fraud without subjecting his property to the reach of his creditors;\n\nf. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\ng. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n36. The Transfers are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to Section 548(a)(i)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code and are recoverable pursuant to Section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n### **SECOND CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfers pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 274, and 276, and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a))**\n\n37. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-32 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n38. The Transfers were made by the Debtor, through his alter ego company, G Fashion, with the actual intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n39. The Debtor's intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors in effectuating the Transfers is shown by, among other things:\n\na. The Transfers were effectuated using an alter-ego shell company;\n\nb. The Transfers were concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n\nc. The Transfers were effectuated as part of the Debtor's \"shell game\" with the aid of the Debtor's family members and other lieutenants and subordinates that he controlled in an effort to conceal and shield assets;\n\nd. The Transfers furthered the Debtor's fraudulent conduct by enabling the Debtor to benefit from his fraud without subjecting his property to the reach of his creditors;\n\ne. The Transfers furthered the Debtor's fraudulent conduct by enabling the Debtor to profit from his fraud without subjecting his property to the reach of his creditors;\n\nf. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\ng. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n40. The Transfers are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276, and section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n### **THIRD CLAIM**\n\n## **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Constructive Fraudulent Transfer Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code §§ 548(a)(1)(B) and 550(a))**\n\n41. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-32 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n42. The Debtor received less than a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Transfers.\n\n43. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or became insolvent as a result of the Transfers.\n\n44. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor was engaged in a business or transaction, or was about to engage in a business or transaction, for which any property remaining with the Debtor was an unreasonably small amount of capital.\n\n45. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor intended to incur or believed he would incur, debts that would be beyond his ability to pay as such debts matured.\n\n46. The Transfers constitute fraudulent transfers and are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code and are recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n### **FOURTH CLAIM**\n\n**(Claim to Avoid and Recover Constructive Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276 and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a))**\n\n47. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-32 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n48. The Debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Transfers.\n\n49. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or the Debtor became insolvent as a result of the Transfers.\n\n50. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor was engaged in a business or transaction, or was about to engage in a business or transaction which any property remaining with the Debtor was an unreasonably small amount of capital.\n\n51. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor intended to incur, or believed or reasonably should have believed that he would incur, debts that would be beyond his ability to pay as such debt matured.\n\n52. The Transfers are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276 and section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and are recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n*[THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK.]*\n\n#### **PRAYER FOR RELIEF**\n\nWHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, the Trustee respectfully requests that judgment be entered as follows:\n\n1. On the First Claim, an order declaring that the Transfers in an amount not less than \\$472,166.63 are avoided pursuant to Section 548(a)(1)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code; (b) an order directing that the Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfers or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to Section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n2. On the Second Claim, an order declaring that the Transfers in an amount not less than \\$472,166.63 are avoided pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276; (b) an order directing that the Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law section 276 and section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n3. On the Third Claim, (a) an order declaring that the Transfers in an amount not less than \\$472,166.63 are avoided pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code; (b) an order directing that the Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n4. On the Fourth Claim, an order declaring that the Transfers in an amount not less than \\$472,166.63 are avoided pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276; (b) an order directing that the Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law section 276 and section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n5. Awarding the Trustee pre-judgment interest at the maximum legal rate from the date of the filing of this Complaint to the date of judgment herein; and\n\n6. Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just, proper, or equitable under the circumstances.\n\n[*Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank*]\n\nDated: February 10, 2024 New Haven, CT\n\nLUC A. DESPINS CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE\n\nBy: /s/ \\_\\_Douglas Skalka\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_*\\_\\_\\_\\_* Douglas S. Skalka (ct00616) Patrick R. Linsey (ct29437) NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C. 195 Church Street, 13th Floor New Haven, Connecticut 06510 (203) 781-2847 dskalka@npmlaw.com plinsey@npmlaw.com *Counsel for the Chapter 11 Trustee*\n\n| ID # | Account Holder | Date | Amount |\n|------|-------------------------------|------------|--------------------|\n| 1 | G Fashion | 11/3/2020 | \\$
(90,000.00) |\n| 2 | G Fashion | 12/22/2020 | (90,000.00) |\n| 3 | G Fashion | 1/15/2021 | (13,043.64) |\n| 4 | G Fashion | 1/22/2021 | (90,000.00) |\n| 5 | G Fashion | 2/9/2021 | (30,525.00) |\n| 6 | G Fashion | 4/1/2021 | (90,000.00) |\n| 7 | G Fashion | 4/9/2021 | (10,615.39) |\n| 8 | G Fashion | 4/30/2021 | (57,982.60) |\n| | Total - Payments to Hugga LLC | | \\$
(472,166.63) |\n\n# **SCHEDULE A**","body_zh":"B1040（表格 1040）（12/15）\n\n对抗程序封面表\n（说明见背面） 对抗程序编号\n（仅供法院使用）\n\n原告 被告\nLuc A. Despins（卢克·A.·德斯平斯），第 11 章受托人 Hugga LLC（Hugga有限责任公司）\n律师（律所名称、地址和电话号码） 律师 （如已知）\nDouglas S. Skalka（道格拉斯·S.·斯卡尔卡），Patrick R. Linsey（帕特里克·R.·林赛）\nNeubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.（纽伯特、佩佩与蒙泰思律师事务所）\n195 Church St. 13th Floor New Haven, CT 06510\n(203)781-2847\n当事人（仅勾选一项） 当事人（仅勾选一项）\n□ 债务人\n□ 美国\n受托人/破产管理人 □ 债务人\n□ 美国受托人/破产\n管理人\n□ 债权人\n□ 其他 □ 债权人 □ 其他\n□ 受托人 □ 受托人\n诉因\n（简要说明诉因，包括所涉全部美国法律条文）\n第 11 章受托人依据《破产法典》第 544、548 及 550 条以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第 273、274 及 276 条，\n请求撤销并追回欺诈性转让及获得相关救济的起诉状\n\n诉讼性质\n（最多为五（5）个方框编号，以主要诉因为 1，第一个备选诉因为 2，第二个备选诉因为 3，依此类推。）\nFRBP 7001(1) – 追回金钱/财产 FRBP 7001(6) – 可免责性（续）\n□\n11-追回金钱/财产 - §542 财产移交 □\n61-可免责性 - §523(a)(5)，家庭扶养\n□\n12-追回金钱/财产 - §547 优先受偿\n□ □\n68-可免责性 - §523(a)(6)，故意且恶意造成的损害\n13-追回金钱/财产 - §548 欺诈性转让\n□ □\n63-可免责性 - §523(a)(8)，学生贷款\n□\n14-追回金钱/财产 - 其他 64-可免责性 - §523(a)(15)，离婚或分居义务\nFRBP 7001(2) – 留置权的有效性、优先权或范围 □ （家庭扶养义务除外）\n□\n21-留置权或其他财产权益的有效性、优先权或范围 65-可免责性 - 其他\nFRBP 7001(7) – 禁令救济\nFRBP 7001(3) – 批准出售财产\n□ □\n71-禁令救济 – 实施停止令\n31-批准出售破产财产及共同所有人财产 - §363(h) □ 72-禁令救济 – 其他\nFRBP 7001(4) – 对免责提出异议/撤销免责 FRBP 7001(8) 债权或权益从属\n□\n41-对免责提出异议/撤销免责 - §727(c),(d),(e) □ 81-债权或权益从属\n\nFRBP 7001(5) – 撤销确认\n□\n51-撤销确认 FRBP 7001(9) 确认判决\n□ 91-确认判决\nFRBP 7001(6) – 可免责性 FRBP 7001(10) 对移送诉讼的裁定\n□\n66-可免责性 - §523(a)(1),(14),(14A) 优先税务债权 □ 01-对移送债权或诉因的裁定\n□\n62-可免责性 - §523(a)(2)，虚假借口、虚假陈述、\n实际欺诈\n□ 其他\n□\n67-可免责性 - §523(a)(4)，受托人欺诈、侵占、盗窃 □ SS-SIPA 案件 – 15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq.\n（续见下一栏） 02-其他（例如，如与破产案件无关本应在州法院提起的其他诉讼）\n□ 如本案涉及州法实体争议问题，请勾选 □ 如主张本案为 FRCP 23 项下集体诉讼，请勾选\n□ 如起诉状中要求陪审团审判，请勾选 请求金额 \\$\n请求的其他救济\n\nB1040（表格 1040）（12/15）\n\n本对抗程序所依据的破产案件\n\n债务人姓名 破产案件编号\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵） 22-50073 (JAM)\n案件审理地区 分院办事处 法官姓名\nConnecticut（康涅狄格州） Bridgeport（布里奇波特） Julie A. Manning（朱莉·A.·曼宁）\n相关对抗程序（如有）\n原告 被告 对抗\n程序编号\n\n对抗程序审理地区 分院办事处 法官姓名\n\n律师（或原告）签名\n\n/s/ Douglas Skalka\n\n日期 律师（或原告）姓名正楷\n\nFebruary 10, 2024 Douglas Skalka\n\n说明\n\n提交破产案件会在破产法院管辖下设立一项“财产集合”，其中包括债务人的全部财产，无论该等财产位于何处。由于破产财产集合范围广泛，且法院管辖权极为宽泛，可能会就该财产集合的财产或财产权利发生诉讼。也可能存在有关债务人免责的诉讼。如该等诉讼在破产法院提起，则称为对抗程序。\n\n提起对抗程序的一方还必须填妥并提交表格 1040，即《对抗程序封面表》，但该方通过法院案件管理/电子案件提交系统（CM/ECF）以电子方式提起对抗程序的除外。（CM/ECF 在提交程序中收集表格 1040 所载信息。）填妥后，该封面表概述对抗程序的基本信息。法院书记员需要该等信息以处理对抗程序，并编制所需的法院活动统计报告。\n\n封面表及其中所载信息并不替代或补充法律、《破产规则》或法院地方法规要求提交和送达的诉状或其他文件。该封面表大部分内容不言自明，必须由原告律师填妥（如原告未由律师代理，则由原告填妥）。每份提交的起诉状均须向书记员单独提交一份封面表。\n\n原告和被告。请准确填写起诉状中所列的原告和被告姓名。\n\n律师。如已知，请填写律师的姓名和地址。\n\n当事人。请在第一栏中为原告勾选最适当的方框，并在第二栏中为被告勾选最适当的方框。\n\n请求金额。填写起诉状中请求的美元金额。\n\n签名。本封面表必须由登记在案的律师在表格第二页的方框内签署。如原告由律师事务所代理，须由该所成员签署。如原告自行诉讼，即未由律师代理，则须由原告签署。\n美国破产法院 康涅狄格州地区 布里奇波特分院\n\n----------------------------------------------------------- x\n\n关于： :\n:\n第 11 章\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n等， :\n:\n案件编号 22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。 :\n:\n（合并管理）\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A.·德斯平斯），第 11 章\n受托人，\n诉 原告， x\n\n对抗程序编号 [\n]\n\nFebruary\n10,\n\nHUGGA LLC（Hugga有限责任公司）， :\n\n被告。 :\nx\n\n第 11 章受托人依据《破产法典》第 544、548 及 550 条以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第 273、274 及 276 条，请求撤销并追回欺诈性转让及获得相关救济的起诉状\n\nLuc A. Despins（卢克·A.·德斯平斯）以在 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（下称“债务人”或“Kwok”）的第 11 章案件（下称“第 11 章案件”）中获任命的第 11 章受托人（下称“受托人”）身份，提交本\n\n1 本第 11 章案件中的债务人是 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（亦称 Guo Wengui、Miles Guo 和 Miles Kwok，以及众多其他别名）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（税务识别号码后四位：8202）和 Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC 和 Genever Holdings Corporation 的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，c/o Luc A. Despins，作为 Ho Wan Kwok 财产集合的受托人（仅为通知和通信之目的）。\n\n对抗起诉状（下称“起诉状”），针对被告 Hugga LLC（下称“被告”）提出如下陈述：\n诉讼性质\n\n1. 受托人提起本对抗程序，以撤销并追回在本第 11 章案件开始前对债务人财产所作的转让。\n\n2. 债务人通过其另我空壳公司 G Fashion（G时尚）（下称“G Fashion”），在申请日（定义如下）之前向作为初始受让人的被告转让了金额为 \\$472,166.63 的资金。\n\n3. 该等转让属于实际欺诈性转让，因为债务人作为其“空壳游戏”的一部分实施了该等转让，且其作出该等转让的意图是阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人。或者，该等转让属于推定欺诈性转让，因为作出该等转让时债务人已无力清偿债务，且债务人未就此获得合理等值的对价。\n管辖权和审判地\n\n4. 本法院根据 28 U.S.C. §1334(b) 对本对抗程序具有事项管辖权。\n\n5. 本对抗程序已根据 28 U.S.C. §157(a) 移送本法院。\n\n6. 本文所请求救济的法定依据包括《美国法典》第 11 编（下称“破产法典”）第 544、548 和 550 条，以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第 273、274 和 276 条 2 或任何其他适用的州法等同规定。\n\n2 此后，对《纽约州债务人与债权人法》的所有法条引用均称为“N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law”。《纽约州统一可撤销交易法》（“NYUVT”）取代《纽约州统一\n当事人\n\n7. 受托人系根据破产法院于 July 8, 2022 作出的命令，在第 11 章案件中担任第 11 章受托人 [Case No. 22-50073（下称“主案件”）Docket No. 523]。\n\n8. 被告是一家加利福尼亚州有限责任公司，地址为 8948 Burton Way, Beverly Hills, California 90211。\n事实\nA. 第 11 章案件\n\n9. 债务人于 February 15, 2022 在 United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（康涅狄格州地区美国破产法院）（下称“法院”或“破产法院”）根据《美国法典》第 11 编第 11 章（下称“破产法典”）提交自愿救济申请（下称“申请日”），从而开始上述标题所列第 11 章案件（下称“第 11 章案件”）。\n\n10. 于 March 21, 2002，Office of the United States Trustee（美国受托人办公室）在本第 11 章案件中任命了无担保债权人正式委员会。尚未任命审查员。\n\n11. 债务人于 March 2022 向破产法院提交的破产财产清单声称，其拥有 \\$3,850 的资产，并产生了数亿美元的负债。3 尽管债务人确实负债累累，但其财产清单未披露债务人通过其众多另我空壳公司（包括 Lexington（莱克星顿））持有及转让的财产。\n\n《欺诈性转让法》（“NYUFC”），并于 April 4, 2020 生效，且适用于在 April 4, 2020 当日或之后作出的转让或产生的义务。\n\n3 资产及负债清单，第 1 页（主案件，Docket No. 78）。\n\n12. 于 June 15, 2022，法院作出决定备忘录及命令 [主案件 Docket No. 465]，指示美国受托人在第 11 章案件中任命一名第 11 章受托人。根据该命令，美国受托人选定 Luc A. Despins 作为受托人。于 July 8, 2022，法院作出命令，批准任命 Luc A. Despins 为第 11 章案件的受托人 [主案件 Docket No. 523]。\nB. 债务人对空壳公司的使用及受托人的对抗程序\n\n13. Lexington 是债务人用于阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的众多另我空壳公司之一。4 多年来，债务人一直策划一场“空壳游戏”，利用由家庭成员和/或已知下属名义持有、但实际上由债务人控制的复杂空壳公司网络。该空壳游戏使债务人得以使用、支出和/或转让数百万美元现金及其他资产，同时向债权人隐瞒其财产。\n\n14. 自获任命以来，受托人已在第 11 章案件中提起多项对抗程序，其中包括确认债务人的空壳公司是其另我和/或该等公司及其资产在衡平法上归债务人所有；在若干案件中，破产法院已准予该等救济。5\n\n4 受托人已提起或即将对 G Fashion 提起对抗程序，该对抗程序除其他事项外，请求作出确认判决，确认 G Fashion 是债务人的另我。受托人通过引用将其在该对抗程序中提交的起诉状并入本文。\n\n5 这些对抗诉讼包括以下案件：(i) Luc A. Despins（吕西·A·德斯平斯），第11章受托人诉 HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC（HK国际基金投资〔美国〕有限公司）等案 [对抗诉讼案号 22-05003]；(ii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 Greenwich Land LLC（格林威治地产有限责任公司）等案 [对抗诉讼案号 23-05005]；(iii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 Mei Guo（郭梅）案 [对抗诉讼案号 23-05008]；(iv) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 HCHK Technologies, Inc.（HCHK科技公司）等案 [对抗诉讼案号 23-05013]；(v) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 Taurus Fund LLC（金牛基金有限责任公司）等案 [对抗诉讼案号 23-05017]；(vi) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 Golden Spring (New York) Limited（黄金泉〔纽约〕有限公司）案 [对抗诉讼案号 23-05018]；以及 (vii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 Lamp Capital LLC（兰普资本有限责任公司）等案 [对抗诉讼案号 23-05023]。\n\n15. 这些诉讼中的事实模式一贯包括：(i) 由近亲属和/或下属持有的、由债务人控制的空壳公司；(ii) 使用来自其他由债务人控制的实体的现金购买的资产，和/或在未支付对价的情况下转让给空壳实体及在空壳实体之间转让的资产；以及 (iii) 债务人从该等资产中受益并对其享有控制权和支配权。\n\nC. 债务人为阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债权人所实施的行为\n\n16. 除受托人在其对抗诉讼中所处理的事项外，破产法院还认定，债务人是 Ace Decade Limited（艾斯十年有限公司）（并通过该公司成为 Dawn State Limited（晨州有限公司））的实益所有人，且债务人控制并利用了 Ace Decade Limited 的名义股东 Yvette Wang（王伊薇）。6\n\n17. 破产法院还认定，“G Entities”（G实体）（Gettr、G Fashion、G Music、GClubs、GNews 和 GEdu）、New Federal State of China（新中国联邦）和 Rule of Law Foundation（法治基金会），以及其他声称独立的实体和组织，均受债务人控制7、由债务人领导8，和/或“服务于……债务人的目的，并作为债务人的商业工具”。9\n\n18. 在申请日之前，United States District Court for the Southern District of New York（美国纽约南区联邦地区法院）的 Liman 法官认定，Eastern Profit Corporation Limited（东方盈利有限公司）——该实体在转让给债务人的女儿之前，最初由债务人的一名司机所有——“实质上是”债务人的一家空壳公司。10\n\n6 准许要求裁定债务人藐视公司治理命令之动议的命令，第1段、第4段（Jan. 24, 2023, Docket No. 1372（“公司治理藐视命令”））。\n\n7 经更正的部分准许初步禁令动议之裁定备忘录，第3段（对抗诉讼案号 22-05032, January 13, 2023（“债务人还控制 Saraca Media Group（萨拉卡媒体集团）和关联实体‘GTV’。”））。\n\n8 同上，第7段（“债务人是 The Whistleblower Movement（爆料革命）、NFSC、ROLF 和 Himalaya（喜马拉雅）的领导人。”）。\n\n9 同上。（“The Whistleblower Movement、NFSC、ROLF、GSeries 和 Himalaya 服务于债务人的目的，作为债务人的商业工具，其成员个人忠于债务人。”）。\n\n19. 债务人为阻碍和拖延其最大债权人之一，即 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, L.P.（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金，有限合伙企业）（“PAX”）的追偿工作，竭尽全力。2017年，PAX 在 Supreme Court of the State of New York（纽约州最高法院）（“纽约法院”）提起针对债务人的诉讼，案卷索引号 652077/2017（“PAX案件”），请求就所欠款项作出判决。2021年2月3日，PAX 从纽约法院获得针对债务人的 $116,402,019.57 判决（“PAX判决”）。PAX 试图通过扣押债务人的资产来执行 PAX判决——包括 Lady May（梅夫人号），债务人虚假声称该游艇为其女儿所有；以及债务人在曼哈顿的豪华公寓，债务人虚假声称该公寓为其儿子以信托方式持有。债务人在判决后程序中不遵守纽约法院命令，最终导致其被处以 $134 million 的藐视法庭罚款。\n\n20. 债务人还将其替身实体，包括 G Fashion（G时尚），作为个人钱袋使用，在将资产隐匿于该等替身实体、使债权人无法就其债权获得追偿并阻碍和拖延债权人追偿的同时，为其本人及其家人已习惯的奢侈生活方式提供资金。债务人通过该等替身实体实施的转让延续了债务人的欺诈计划。\n\n10 Eastern Profit Corp. Ltd. v. Strategic Vision US LLC（东方盈利有限公司诉战略远景美国有限责任公司）, No. 18-CV-2185 (LJL) 2021 WL 2554631, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. June 22, 2021).\n\n21. 债务人已在破产法院作证称，其资产不足以偿付其负债，且其奢侈生活方式由其家人通过名义上由家庭成员持有的企业提供资金。11 债务人仅列报了 $3,850 的资产。12\n\n22. 2023年3月，债务人被逮捕，并因包括电信欺诈、证券欺诈和洗钱在内的联邦刑事指控候审期间仍被羁押。\n\n23. 美国政府在对债务人的刑事起诉书中主张，债务人及其共同被告“利用以至少80个不同实体或个人名义持有的500多个账户，洗白了超过 $1 billion 的欺诈所得。”13\n\n24. 债务人的替身实体的财产，包括 G Fashion 的财产，在申请日前任何时候均为债务人的财产。\n\n25. 在与本案有关的所有期间，债务人在纽约州纽约市开展业务，包括指示实施该等转让。\n\nD. 为阻碍、拖延或欺诈债权人而作出的转让\n\n26. 本起诉状所涉转让，系为阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人之目的而作出，因其均通过债务人的替身空壳公司作出，该等公司作为债务人空壳把戏的一部分运营。\n\n11 关于债务人请求作出临时及最终 DIP 命令之动议的听证会：(I) 授权债务人取得无担保、次级的申请后融资；(II) 安排临时及最终听证会；以及 (III) 准予相关救济（主案, April 27, 2022）\n\n12 见注4\n\n13 见 United States of America（美利坚合众国）反对被告 Yanping Wang（王艳萍）审前释放动议的法律备忘录，第29页，作为第11章受托人对 G Club Operations LLC（G俱乐部运营有限责任公司）就受托人强制执行动议及相关救济请求所提补充异议的答复之附件B（June 23, 2023, Main Case Docket No. 1934）。\n\n27. 债务人故意以此方式安排其财务事务，以在向其众多债权人虚假宣称贫困的同时，隐匿并耗散数百万美元资产。债务人声称自己一贫如洗，却同时大量花费，以维持其本人、其家庭成员和密切关联人士的亿万富翁生活方式。\n\n28. 债务人隐匿和耗散的资产，包括其从加密货币、证券及其他欺诈计划的受害人处取得的资金。由于该等行为，债务人在 United States District Court for the Southern District of New York 面临一起待决刑事案件中的多项重罪欺诈、洗钱和敲诈勒索指控。见 United States v. Ho Wan Kwok（美利坚合众国诉郭文贵）, case no. 1:23-cr-00118-AT [ECF No. 215] (Jan. 3, 2024 S.D.N.Y.)。\n\n29. 债务人明知并意图通过以此方式隐匿和耗散其资产，将不会剩余足够资产偿还其债权人——包括其欺诈行为的众多受害人。因此，该等转让必然是为阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人之目的而作出。\n\nE. 向被告作出的转让\n\n30. 在申请日之前，债务人通过包括 G Fashion 在内的空壳公司，或以其他方式，向被告转让了债务人的财产（统称“该等转让”），包括但不限于如下：\n\n见随附并构成本文件一部分的附表A。\n\n31. 在该等转让发生时，债务人对债务人财产的债权人负有未清偿义务。\n\n32. 被告是该等转让的初始受让人。\n\n第一项请求\n\n（根据《破产法典》§§ 548(a)(1)(A) 和 550(a) 撤销并追回实际欺诈性转让之请求）\n\n33. 受托人重复陈述并重新主张第1至32段所载主张，如同在此完整列明。\n\n34. 债务人通过其替身实体 G Fashion 作出该等转让时，具有阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图。\n\n35. 债务人在实施该等转让时阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，除其他事项外，可由以下事实证明：\n\na. 该等转让使用一家替身空壳公司实施；\n\nb. 该等转让向债务人的债权人隐瞒；\n\nc. 该等转让是在债务人受其控制的家庭成员及其他得力助手和下属协助下，作为债务人“空壳把戏”的一部分实施，目的在于隐匿和遮蔽资产；\n\nd. 该等转让使债务人得以从其欺诈中获益，而不使其财产受其债权人追索，从而推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 该等转让使债务人得以从其欺诈中获利，而不使其财产受其债权人追索，从而推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在该等转让发生时，债务人正被起诉，包括 PAX 在 PAX案件中对其提起的诉讼；以及\n\ng. 在该等转让发生时，债务人无力清偿债务或资本不足。\n\n36. 该等转让可由受托人根据《破产法典》第548(a)(1)(A)条予以撤销，并可根据《破产法典》第550(a)条予以追回。\n\n第二项请求\n\n（根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 274, and 276，以及 Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a) 撤销并追回实际欺诈性转让之请求）\n\n37. 受托人重复陈述并重新主张第1至32段所载主张，如同在此完整列明。\n\n38. 债务人通过其替身公司 G Fashion 作出该等转让时，具有阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图。\n\n39. 债务人在实施该等转让时阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，除其他事项外，可由以下事实证明：\n\na. 该等转让使用一家替身空壳公司实施；\n\nb. 该等转让向债务人的债权人隐瞒；\n\nc. 该等转让是在债务人受其控制的家庭成员及其他得力助手和下属协助下，作为债务人“空壳把戏”的一部分实施，目的在于隐匿和遮蔽资产；\n\nd. 该等转让使债务人得以从其欺诈中获益，而不使其财产受其债权人追索，从而推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 该等转让使债务人得以从其欺诈中获利，而不使其财产受其债权人追索，从而推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在该等转让发生时，债务人正被起诉，包括 PAX 在 PAX案件中对其提起的诉讼；以及\n\ng. 在该等转让发生时，债务人无力清偿债务或资本不足。\n\n40. 该等转让可由受托人根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276 以及《破产法典》第544(b)条予以撤销，并可根据《破产法典》第550(a)条予以追回。\n\n第三项请求\n\n（根据《破产法典》§§ 548(a)(1)(B) 和 550(a) 撤销并追回推定欺诈性转让之请求）\n\n41. 受托人重复陈述并重新主张第1至32段所载主张，如同在此完整列明。\n\n42. 债务人就该等转让所获得的对价低于合理等值。\n\n43. 在该等转让发生时，债务人无力清偿债务，或因该等转让而变得无力清偿债务。\n\n44. 在该等转让发生时，债务人正在从事某项业务或交易，或即将从事某项业务或交易，而债务人所保留的任何财产均构成不合理地少量的资本。\n\n45. 在转让发生时，债务人意图产生，或相信其将产生在该等债务到期时超出其偿付能力的债务。\n\n46. 该等转让构成欺诈性转让，受托人可依据《破产法》section 548(a)(1)(B)予以撤销，并可依据《破产法》section 550(a)予以追回。\n\n第四项请求\n\n（根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276 及《破产法》sections 544(b) and 550(a)请求撤销并追回推定欺诈性转让）\n\n47. 受托人重申并重新主张第1至32段所载的指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n48. 债务人未就该等转让获得合理等值。\n\n49. 在转让发生时，债务人无力偿债，或债务人因该等转让而变得无力偿债。\n\n50. 在转让发生时，债务人正在从事某项业务或交易，或即将从事某项业务或交易，而债务人留存的任何财产对于该业务或交易而言构成数额不合理地过小的资本。\n\n51. 在转让发生时，债务人意图产生，或相信或理应相信其将产生在该等债务到期时超出其偿付能力的债务。\n\n52. 受托人可依据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276 及《破产法》section 544(b)撤销该等转让，并可依据《破产法》section 550(a)予以追回。\n\n[本页其余部分有意留白。]\n\n救济请求\n\n因此，基于前述理由，受托人谨请求作出如下判决：\n\n1. 就第一项请求，作出命令，宣告金额不少于 $472,166.63 的该等转让根据《破产法》Section 548(a)(1)(A)予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该等转让；以及 (c) 依据《破产法》Section 550(a)(1)，为债务人财产之利益，从被告处追回该等转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n2. 就第二项请求，作出命令，宣告金额不少于 $472,166.63 的该等转让根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276 予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该等转让；以及 (c) 依据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law section 276 及《破产法》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人财产之利益，从被告处追回该等转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n3. 就第三项请求，(a) 作出命令，宣告金额不少于 $472,166.63 的该等转让根据《破产法》section 548(a)(1)(B)予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该等转让；以及 (c) 依据《破产法》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人财产之利益，从被告处追回该等转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n4. 就第四项请求，作出命令，宣告金额不少于 $472,166.63 的该等转让根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276 予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该等转让；以及 (c) 依据 N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law section 276 及《破产法》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人财产之利益，从被告处追回该等转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n5. 判给受托人自提交本起诉状之日起至本案判决之日止按最高法定利率计算的判决前利息；以及\n\n6. 法院在该等情形下认为公正、适当或衡平的其他及进一步救济。\n\n[本页其余部分有意留白]\n\n日期：February 10, 2024 New Haven, CT\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平斯）第11章受托人\n\n签字人：/s/ __Douglas Skalka________*_____* Douglas S. Skalka（道格拉斯·S·斯卡尔卡）(ct00616) Patrick R. Linsey（帕特里克·R·林赛）(ct29437) NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.（诺伊伯特、佩佩和蒙泰思专业公司）195 Church Street, 13th Floor New Haven, Connecticut 06510 (203) 781-2847 dskalka@npmlaw.com plinsey@npmlaw.com 第11章受托人代理律师\n\n编号 账户持有人 日期 金额\n\n1 G Fashion（G时尚） 11/3/2020 $\n(90,000.00)\n\n2 G Fashion 12/22/2020 (90,000.00)\n\n3 G Fashion 1/15/2021 (13,043.64)\n\n4 G Fashion 1/22/2021 (90,000.00)\n\n5 G Fashion 2/9/2021 (30,525.00)\n\n6 G Fashion 4/1/2021 (90,000.00)\n\n7 G Fashion 4/9/2021 (10,615.39)\n\n8 G Fashion 4/30/2021 (57,982.60)\n\n合计 - 向 Hugga LLC（哈加有限责任公司）支付的款项 $\n(472,166.63)\n\n附表A","key_entities":["Despins","Kwok","Je","Ho Wan Kwok","Guo","Himalaya","Miles Guo","Yanping Wang","HCHK","GTV","Saraca","GETTR","Paul Hastings","Pro Se","pro se"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":215,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":5066,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 20:17:48"}