The bitter end of a man who was 'sent to court' because of his greed for high interest

Loan for 3 days, "thanked" 8 million VND

Mr. Nguyen Cong H. (residing in Yen Thanh town) was identified as the victim in the case.fraud and appropriation of propertyby Bui Thi Oanh (born in 1988) and Pham Thi Thuy (born in 1982), both residing in Yen Thanh. At the time of the incident, Thuy was a credit officer at Agribank, Yen Thanh district branch.

In August 2018, Mr. H. had just sold his farm for several billion VND. He had no plans to spend the money, so when Ms. T. - an acquaintance - introduced him, Mr. H. agreed to lend Bui Thi Oanh 350 million VND.

“Oanh said she borrowed 350 million VND from Yen Thanh District Agricultural Bank because Ms. Thuy, an officer here, did the paperwork for her. Now the payment deadline has come. She wants to borrow the money from me to turn over the star fruit. Oanh said she only borrowed it for 3 days. I thought it was simple so I agreed.

Victim Nguyen Cong H. Photo: Nhu Binh

Although I agreed to lend Oanh the money, because I did not trust this woman, I went with Ms. T. to the bank, paid the money directly to Thuy, and had a proper receipt. I asked Ms. Thuy how many days it would take to get the money back, Thuy said to come back in 3-5 days to receive the money. Exactly 5 days later, I went to the bank and received the full amount of 350 million VND," Mr. H. said.

On the day he deposited money into the bank, Mr. H. was given 20 million VND by Ms. T., saying it was from Oanh as a thank you for “helping with an important matter”. Thinking that the money was from Oanh to thank all three people, Mr. H. gave Ms. T. 12 million VND.

After this loan, Mr. H. found that the loanbank deed islandquite simple, helping others in difficult times and being “thanked” generously, moreover, during the lending process, he also had good reviews of the female bank officer Thuy. A new business direction flashed in his mind.

“After that, Thuy met me in person, with Oanh there. Thuy said that she was a bank officer, working with many customers who needed to change the deed, if she had money, she would lend Thuy to change the deed for the customer. Thuy assured me that she was a bank officer who would do this directly and that I would not lose anything, so I agreed. Thuy also told me that when she needed to borrow money, she would notify me through Oanh. After that, after receiving information about the amount of money needed through Oanh, I went directly to the bank to transfer money to Thuy's account. I deposited a total of 1 billion 675 million VND into Pham Thi Thuy's account 6 times, all of these deposits had full receipts,” Mr. H. continued.

However, later, Mr. H. learned that he was the victim of a fraud involving fraudulent bank loans by Thuy and Oanh.

The investigation agency determined that Oanh was the person who directly committed fraudulent acts with Thuy to defraud and appropriate other people's property for personal gain. This act stemmed from the fact that the defendant Oanh was in debt and needed money to pay. The investigation agency and the People's Court of Yen Thanh district concluded that the amount of money that Mr. H. had been appropriated by Thuy and Oanh was 400 million VND, of which Oanh appropriated 210 million VND and Thuy appropriated 190 million VND. With the trick of defrauding and defrauding contracts, Oanh also borrowed 550 million VND from Mr. Nguyen Huu L. (Yen Thanh), but when the incident was discovered, she returned 510 million VND to this person and appropriated 40 million VND.

Defendant Bui Thi Oanh. Photo: Nhu Binh

For the crime of “Fraudulent appropriation of property”, Bui Thi Oanh was sentenced to 7 years in prison by the People’s Court of Yen Thanh district; Pham Thi Thuy was sentenced to 8 years in prison. The court ordered the two defendants to return the 400 million VND they had appropriated from Mr. H.

“I transferred 1 billion 675 million VND to Thuy’s account to lend her. Oanh returned 560 million VND to me, so I have now been robbed of 1 billion 115 million VND. Why did the court conclude that I was only robbed of 400 million VND? So where did the remaining 1 billion VND go?”, Mr. H. said.

Believing that the first instance verdict was not in accordance with the nature of the case, Mr. Nguyen Cong H. filed an appeal requesting the entire first instance verdict to be annulled and a reinvestigation conducted.

The defendants appropriated more than 500 million VND!

Defendant Pham Thi Thuy also filed a complaint.appealappeal to the People's Court of Nghe An province. Thuy said that all of the confessions of the defendant Oanh as well as the statements of the victims, related people, and witnesses were not enough grounds to convict the defendant; the documents and evidence were not legally sufficient to determine that the defendant was Oanh's accomplice in the fraud of appropriating 400 million VND from Mr. H.

Defendant Thuy also said that there was no documentary evidence to prove that there was any agreement or business between her and Oanh. Pham Thi Thuy only agreed to help Oanh when Oanh asked her to withdraw money when someone deposited it into Thuy's bank account.

Meanwhile, during the investigation and trial, defendant Bui Thi Oanh confessed that she received 560 million VND that Thuy gave to pay Mr. H. Defendant Oanh also admitted to appropriating 210 million VND from Mr. H. and affirmed that Thuy kept the remaining 905 million VND and did not know whether she returned it to Mr. H. or not.

During the questioning and debate at the appeal hearing, the panel of judges concluded that there was sufficient basis for the first instance court to conclude that the defendant Oanh and Thuy were accomplices in appropriating 400 million VND from Mr. H., which was not a complete and comprehensive assessment of the documents and evidence collected in the case file. According to the testimony of the defendants Oanh and Mr. H. as well as the documents and evidence collected, there was sufficient basis to determine that the amount of money that defendant Oanh appropriated from Mr. H. was 1 billion 115 million VND.

Defendants Bui Thi Oanh and Pham Thi Thuy. Photo: Nhu Binh

The appellate court also pointed out that the first instance court's conclusion that defendant Pham Thi Thuy had appropriated VND190 million was flawed. "This act of defendant Thuy is one of six acts that defendant Oanh committed. However, based on the testimony of defendant Oanh and victim H., there are signs of complicity, but based on the money transfer paper dated May 3, 2019 reflecting that Thuy handed over VND1 billion 485 million to Oanh, there is no solid legal basis to conclude that defendant Thuy was an accomplice in fraud to appropriate property or committed another independent crime," the appellate court said.

In addition, the appellate court also pointed out that the first instance court's determination that the defendant Oanh only appropriated 40 million VND from Mr. Nguyen Huu L. was an incorrect assessment. Oanh used fraudulent means to borrow 550 million VND from Mr. L., and after being discovered, she recovered 510 million VND, leaving a shortfall of 40 million VND. This is a mitigating circumstance for criminal liability, not a case of excluding criminal liability.

The court of first instance concluded that the defendants were accomplices in appropriating property (under 500 million VND) under Clause 3, Article 174 of the Penal Code, which was an incomplete investigation, prosecution, and trial. The appellate court determined that there was a basis to infer that the defendants committed the crime of appropriating property worth 500 million VND or more, violating Clause a, Point 4, Article 174 of the Penal Code. In addition, regarding civil liability, the first instance judgment was still lacking in the decision not to force defendant Oanh to compensate Mr. L. for the remaining amount of 40 million VND appropriated.

The appellate court declared that it did not accept the appeal of defendant Pham Thi Thuy, accepted part of the appeal of victim Nguyen Cong H., annulled the first instance judgment, and returned the case to Yen Thanh District People's Court for settlement according to regulations.

According to Point a, Clause 4, Article 174 of the 2015 Penal Code, the crime of fraud to appropriate property in which the value of the appropriated property is from 500 million VND or more, is punishable by imprisonment from 12 to 20 years or life imprisonment, which is an especially serious case. According to Article 268 of the 2015 Criminal Procedure Code, the authority to investigate cases in especially serious cases belongs to the provincial-level investigation agency.