Can the IOU written on carbon paper be equivalent to asking the borrower for the original IOU? Zhao Bao, a resident of this city, has encountered such a problem. He brought a lawsuit to the people's court with a carbon copy of a 50,000 yuan loan, demanding the arrears. However, after the first and second trials, the court has been arguing whether the carbon copy can be used as evidence. Finally, the Municipal Higher People's Court found that the carbon copy belonged to the original evidence through retrial, which supported Zhao Bao's claim. As early as the end of 200 1, Qin Wang borrowed 50,000 yuan from Zhao Bao and gave him an iou for borrowing 50,000 yuan. However, the IOU is a duplicate, signed by Qin Wang and kept by Zhao Bao. Since then, Qin Wang has never returned the arrears. At the beginning of 2003, Zhao Bao took Qin Wang to court with an IOU of 50,000 yuan, demanding a loan. The court of first instance found that the loan relationship between the two parties was established and sentenced Qin Wang to repay the loan of 50,000 yuan. After the verdict, Qin Wang refused to accept it and appealed to the Intermediate People's Court. After the trial, the Intermediate People's Court held that the loan held by Zhao Bao was a carbon copy and there was no original. Zhao Bao's claim was rejected according to the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Litigation. Zhao Bao naturally refused to accept the judgment of the second instance of the Intermediate People's Court and applied to the Intermediate People's Court for retrial. When the Intermediate People's Court retried, Qin Wang applied for the authenticity appraisal of the signature on the carbon copy, which was verified by the Ministry of Public Security. The Intermediate People's Court held that the carbon paper was made of medium carbon paper and completed synchronously with the original, and the signature in the carbon paper was appraised by the Ministry of Public Security, so it upheld the judgment of the District Court and supported Zhao Bao's claim. Qin Wang applied to the High Court for a retrial of the revised judgment. After examination, the Municipal Higher People's Court held that although the carbon copy was different from the original, it was formed by medium carbon paper and completed synchronously with the original, which was the original evidence. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the retrial judgment of the Intermediate People's Court recognized the duplicate of the IOU, and there was nothing improper. The High Court upheld the retrial judgment of the Intermediate Court and rejected Qin Wang's application for retrial. ■ The crux of the judge's comment on this case lies in his understanding of the carbon copy. The judgment of the second instance of the Intermediate People's Court is to equate carbon paper with a copy. In fact, there is a difference between carbon paper and photocopy. Modern Chinese Dictionary says that carbon paper is written on medium carbon paper, and you can write several copies at a time. Plagiarism means reprinting as it is. The only physical evidence in this case is a duplicate written iou. Because carbon paper is not the original, it is formed by media carbon paper, which is different from the original. Although carbon paper is different from the original, it is made of medium carbon paper and completed synchronously with the original. It can be made in duplicate or in multiple copies, and each copy should be completed simultaneously with the original, which should belong to the original evidence. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the retrial judgment of the Intermediate People's Court confirmed that the iou on the carbon paper was correct. It should be pointed out that no matter how many copies exist, after one copy is confirmed to be valid according to law, the others naturally lose their validity.