How to divide the property in divorce when one spouse uses the joint property of the couple to give gifts on a live streaming platform without the consent of the other spouse? Today, the Supreme People's Court held a press conference to release the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Marriage and Family Part of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (II)" (hereinafter referred to as the "Interpretation"). Explanation lt; Two gt It is clear that if one spouse, without the consent of the other, uses the common property of the couple as a reward on an online live streaming platform, and the amount significantly exceeds their family's general consumption level, seriously damaging the interests of the common property of the couple, it can be recognized as "extravagance" as stipulated in Article 1066 and Article 1092 of the Civil Code. If the other party requests to divide the joint property of the husband and wife during the existence of the marriage relationship, or requests to divide the joint property of the husband and wife less or less than the reward given to one party during divorce, the people's court shall support it. In recent years, with the development of China's economy and society, the structure and lifestyle of urban and rural families have undergone new changes, and marital and family conflicts have shown new characteristics, with a high number of family dispute cases. In the past three years, courts across the country have concluded approximately 2 million first instance cases of marriage and family inheritance disputes each year, accounting for about 12% of all first instance civil cases. Among them, there are approximately 1.5 million divorce disputes per year, accounting for nearly 80% of all family cases. In divorce disputes, property division becomes the focus. The amount of the subject matter involved has increased, the types of property have diversified, and issues in the fields of marriage, family, and property are intertwined. The number of difficult and complex cases has increased, and the standards for legal application urgently need to be unified. In response to phenomena such as bigamy and cohabitation with others, the reporter noticed that the "Interpretation (II)" has been refined from the following two aspects: firstly, it clarifies the position that bigamy is absolutely invalid. The second is to clarify that the act of disposing of joint property between spouses for the purpose of violating public order and good customs is invalid. As stipulated in Interpretation (II), even if the legal parties to the marriage have already divorced or the spouse has died at the time of litigation, bigamy cannot be converted into a valid marriage from the occurrence of the above circumstances. During the existence of a marital relationship, one party, for the purpose of bigamy, cohabitation with others, or other violations of the duty of fidelity between husband and wife, donates the common property of the couple to others, which not only infringes on the common property rights of the other party, but also runs counter to the socialist core values. In this regard, Interpretation (II) clearly stipulates that such behavior is invalid, and if the other spouse requests a return, the people's court should support it. (New Society)