本报记者范传贵

Our correspondent FanChuanGui

　　本报通讯员辛爽

Our correspondent XinShuang

　　女大学生李莉(化名)因找工作而请假回家，回到学校后却被开除了学籍，原因是她在一门考试中“找人替考”。而学校在考场抓到替考者竟是一名男生。

Female college students lily(aliases)For looking for work and leave home，Back to school but was dismissed from school，The reason is she in a test“For someone to TiKao”。And in the examination room TiKao caught the school was a boy。

　　李莉坚称自己是“被替考”的，是有人想加害于她。面对学校的开除决定，她选择和母校对簿公堂。

Li li insists he is“Was TiKao”of，Is anyone want to harm to her。Facing the school fire decision，She choose and Alma mater to court。

　　近日，河南省郑州市二七区人民法院经审理认为，校方没有充分证据能够证明李莉与被抓男生之间存在替考行为，判决撤销开除学籍处分决定。

recently，Erqi district people's court of zhengzhou city, henan province is being held think，The school no sufficient evidence can prove lily and caught between boys TiKao behavior，Decision to revoke expelled sanctions。

女大学生 Female college students

休假期间被开除学籍 During the vacation being expelled

　　今年22岁的李莉2006年9月考入郑州航空工业管理学院法律系。2011年12月下旬，李莉因找工作需要回到老家河南省周口市。2012年春节，放假结束后回到学校上学。

This year, at the age of 22, lily in September 2006 was admitted to zhengzhou aviation industry management college school of law。In late December of 2011，Li li for looking for work needs to go back to their hometown zhoukou in henan province。The Spring Festival in 2012，After the holiday back to school。

　　然而，等待李莉的却是一纸开除学籍决定。郑州航院以她于2011年12月29日上午参加《马克思主义基本原理概论》考试时找他人替考为由，给予开除学籍处分。

however，Waiting for the lily is a paper expulsion decision。Zhengzhou navigation in her court on December 29, 2011 in the morning《An introduction to the basic principle of marxism》When the exam find another person TiKao grounds，Give expelled disciplinary action。

　　按学校规定，参加考试必须携带身份证、准考证才能进入考场，且需经过监考老师审查核对无异议后，方可进入考场参加考试。李莉认为，自己在《马克思主义基本原理概论》考试前已回老家周口市，根本不在学校。本人的身份证、准考证由自己随身携带保管，不可能有他人代替考试。

According to the regulation of the school，For the exam must carry identity CARDS、Your admission ticket can enter into the examination room，And after the supervisor to check after without objection，Can into the examination room for the exam。Li li think，Himself in《An introduction to the basic principle of marxism》Before the exam, already back to zhoukou city，Isn't in school。His id card、By his admission ticket carry keeping，There may not be others instead of the exam。

　　李莉立即向学校申诉，要求组织听证，并对学校的开除行为提出一连串的质疑:替考人的身份情况、替考人进入考场携带的什么证件、替考发现后扣留的什么手续、扣留替考人的手续是否与李莉有直接关系、李莉与替考人是否存在委托代为考试关系、有没有现场监控录像等情况。

Li li immediately to the school appeal，Requirements organize a hearing，And the school fire behavior put forward a series of question: TiKao the identity of the man、TiKao people into the examination room with what certificate、TiKao found detained after what procedures、TiKao detained the formalities with LiLiYou whether direct relation、Lily and TiKao person entrusted to test whether there is relationship、Have the surveillance video, etc。

　　学校最终没有组织听证，直接维持了之前的处分决定。李莉认为，学校作出的开除学籍处分决定，明显认定事实不清，证据不足，且程序严重违法，请求法院判令撤销被告对原告作出的开除学籍处分的决定。

The school ultimately no organize a hearing，Maintain the sanctions before the direct decision。Li li think，The school to expelled sanctions decision，Obvious fact that is not clear，Insufficient evidence，And serious illegal program，Requesting the court to judge revoked the defendant to make the decision of the sanctions are expelled from school。

郑州航院 Zhengzhou navigation court

开除决定证据确凿 Fired from the decision of evidence

　　被告席上的郑州航院，向法庭提供了开除李莉学籍的证据，并提出:“2011年12月29日，李莉由他人代替考试，被监考老师查获。2012年1月4日，李莉向学校提出申辩，认可考试当日本人不在郑州，但否认找人代替考试。而替考人明确承认是由同学介绍替李莉考试，且有替考试卷以及《郑州航院考试违纪情况说明表》相互印证的情况下，李莉由他人代替考试的证据是充分的，其申辩理由不能成立。”

The dock zhengzhou navigation court，To the courts to provide fire lily one's status as evidence，And put forward some Suggestions:“On dec. 29, 2011，Li li replace by other test，Seized by the supervisor。On January 4, 2012，Li li to schools suggest to speak，On that day I am not in zhengzhou recognized examination，But denied that replace the exam。And TiKao clearly acknowledged by students who is introduced for lily exam，And TiKao papers and《Zhengzhou air courtyard exam discipline case table》By each other，Li li replace by other test evidence was full，The reason why you cannot defend was established。”

　　郑州航院称，根据教育部《普通高等学校学生管理规定》以及倡导诚信的时代要求，该院将学校的各种规章制度汇编成《学生手册》，人手一册向新生发放并组织学习，故每个学生对考试作弊的处罚规定都是清楚的。当查明李莉由他人代替考试这一严重考试作弊行为后，学校根据《郑州航空工业管理学院考务工作实施细则》以及《郑州航空工业管理学院学生违纪处分规定》作出开除学籍的处分决定，依据是充分的。

Zhengzhou navigation court says，According to the ministry of education《Common higher school students management regulations》Promoting honesty and the demand of The Times，The school will be compiled into various rules and regulations《Student handbook》，Beginning to a new release and organizational learning，So each student to cheat in the exam of the punishment of the provisions are clear。When found by others instead of the exam this lily a serious cheating on exams，According to the school《Zhengzhou aviation industry management college thesis detailed rules for the implementation of the work》and《Zhengzhou aviation industry management college students disciplinary regulations》The sanctions are expelled from school to make decision，Basis was full。

　　郑州航院坚持认为，学校作出《关于给予李莉开除学籍处分的决定》证据确凿，适用法律、法规正确，符合法定程序，依法应予维持。原告李莉的起诉缺乏事实和法律依据，不能成立。

Zhengzhou aerospace hospital insists，The school to make《About giving lily expelled dispose of the decision》evidence，Applicable law、Regulations right，Comply with legal procedures，Shall be maintained in accordance with the。The plaintiff lily's lack of facts and legal basis for prosecution，Cannot be established。

一审法院 The first-instance court

认定替考证据不足 TiKao that insufficient evidence

　　法庭根据双方的证据最后确认这样的事实:2011年12月29日上午，在郑州航院组织的《马克思主义基本原理概论》考试中，一名自称叫“王帅”的男生持名为“李莉”的学生证以“李莉”的名字到该校处参加该科考试。监考老师发现后当即报告了学校。当日，“王帅”出具一份说明，内容为“我由同学介绍，到此校考试，考生李莉”。学校即以李莉有由他人代替考试行为为由，于2011年12月30日向李莉家人送达《郑州航空工业管理学院学生违规处理告知书》。李莉强调自己因事不在郑州，从未想过找人替考。因在校期间与其他同学闹过矛盾，李莉怀疑系有人故意报复。

The court according to the evidence the final confirmation to the fact: on December 29, 2011 morning，In the organization of zhengzhou navigation《An introduction to the basic principle of marxism》Examination of，A purported that“WangShuai”The boy called“lily”Student to“lily”Name to the school to take part in the exam。The supervisor immediately after the school report found。On that day，“WangShuai”Issue a description，Content for the“I introduced by students，To this school examination，Examinee lily”。The school is to LiLiYou replace by other examination on the behavior，On December 30, 2011 to the lily family delivered《Zhengzhou aviation industry management college students' handling of violation notice》。Li li emphasized that he for not in zhengzhou，Never want to find someone to TiKao。Because during the period of school and other students make conflict，Lily is suspected was deliberately revenge。

　　郑州市二七区法院经审理认为，高等学校的学生应当遵守法律、法规、遵守学生行为规范和学校的各项管理制度。被告郑州航院认为原告李莉在2011年12月29日上午被告组织的《马克思主义基本原理概论》考试中由他人代替考试，违反考试纪律，但被告提供的证据中自称“王帅”的男生持有的学生证性别为男性，而原告李莉的性别为女性，被告未提供“王帅”的相关身份证明，其提供的“王帅”的照片不能据以认定此人的身份，“王帅”所写的说明亦不能证明其身份，不能证明原告与“王帅”之间存在替考行为。

Erqi district court in zhengzhou city by that，Students of institutions of higher learning should abide by the law、regulations、Abide by the student behaviour and all kinds of school management system。The defendant zhengzhou navigation court considered the plaintiff lily December 29, 2011 the organization of the morning the defendant《An introduction to the basic principle of marxism》In the exam by others instead of the exam，Violating the discipline，But the evidence of the defendant in claims“WangShuai”The boy held for the male gender student id card，And the plaintiff lily gender for women，The defendant did not provide a“WangShuai”The relevant identification，The offer“WangShuai”Photos of the man's identity which can't recognized，“WangShuai”The show also cannot be written to prove his identity，Can't prove the plaintiff and“WangShuai”TiKao between behavior。

　　法院以此认定，郑州航院认为原告有由他人代替考试的行为证据不足，所作出的开除学籍处分决定缺乏事实依据，依法应予撤销。

In court that，Zhengzhou navigation court considered the plaintiff is replace by other test behavior insufficient evidence，Expelled from school to the punishment decision unsubstantiated，Shall be revoked in accordance with the。

　　《法制日报》记者获悉，郑州航院不服一审判决已提出上诉。

《Legal daily》The reporter learns，Zhengzhou navigation court verdict has not appeal。