Nguyen Thi Dau (53 years old, residing at 5 Nguyen Thai Hoc Street, Ha Cau Ward, Ha Dong District, Hanoi) engaged in "loan sharking" activities. During her business, Dau borrowed money from many people at low interest rates, then re-lent it at high interest rates to profit. After borrowing nearly 140 billion VND and 31 SJC gold bars, Dau invited her creditors to her house, declared she was no longer able to repay the debt, and fled.

On July 13th and 14th, the Hanoi City People's Court held a first-instance criminal trial for this case. According to the indictment of the Hanoi City People's Procuracy, during his time engaging in "loan sharking," Dau borrowed nearly 140 billion VND and 31 SJC gold bars from many people at interest rates ranging from 2% to 3% per month, then lent the money to others to earn interest rates from 9% to 15% per month.

From September 1st to September 19th, 2011, despite being completely unable to repay her debts, Dau continued to borrow over 5.6 billion VND from people at interest rates ranging from 6% to 9% per month to pay interest on previous loans and for family expenses. After declaring her inability to repay the debts, Dau and her husband, Nguyen Hong Hao, transferred ownership of the house at 5 Nguyen Thai Hoc Street, Quang Trung Ward, Ha Dong District, to Tran Viet Cuong in Hanoi for 10 billion VND. Notably, Mr. Hao had already mortgaged this house to a bank in Hanoi to borrow 3 billion VND.

Defendant Dậu at the trial.

During the investigation, the investigating agency seized this house to serve the investigation, prosecution, and trial. After declaring bankruptcy, Dau fled from his residence for a period of time, then surrendered to the police.

The investigation revealed that, among the loans from various individuals, Dậu lent 54.9 billion VND to Mr. Nguyễn Đức Thắng, residing in Quang Trung ward, Hà Đông district. During the loan period, Mr. Thắng repaid Dậu nearly 3.3 billion VND and 10,000 USD. Furthermore, Mr. Thắng authorized Dậu to use two plots of land, one measuring 62m2 and the other 154m2, both located in Hà Đông district. When Dậu fled his residence, Mr. Thắng and Dậu had not yet reached an agreement regarding the value of these two plots of land.

According to statements given to the investigating agency, Thang had known Dau and Hao before this case occurred, and Thang had previously lent money to Dau and his wife. Later, needing money for business investment, Thang borrowed money from Dau several times at an interest rate of 15% per month. Every month, Thang and Dau reconciled the accounts and signed payment receipts. The final settlement involved Thang writing two promissory notes to Dau for a total amount exceeding 145 billion VND (including 54.9 billion VND in loan and nearly 90.6 billion VND in interest).

Thang confessed that the purpose of writing the promissory note was so that Dau could prove that Thang owed Dau an amount equivalent to what Dau owed other people. Because there was insufficient evidence to determine Thang's complicity with Dau in this case, the investigating agency separated Thang's actions for further investigation and processing later.

The investigation also determined that Nguyen Van Tuan, residing in Quyet Thang ward, Son La city, Son La province, was the one who wrote the promissory note for 31 billion VND borrowed from Dau. However, Dau testified to the investigating authorities that she did not give this money to Tuan. Tuan claimed that he wrote the promissory note to help Dau prove that the money she borrowed was used to lend to others for business purposes, thereby building trust so that people would continue to lend her money. Due to insufficient evidence to determine that Tuan was an accomplice, the investigating authorities did not pursue charges against him.

Of the 62 loan receipts Dậu had, 25 bore the signature of her husband, Mr. Hảo. However, Dậu claimed that she was the one who borrowed the money and had used all the funds associated with Mr. Hảo's signature.

During the investigation, the investigating agency concluded that, although there was insufficient evidence to determine that Mr. Hao was an accomplice with Dau in this case, Mr. Hao must bear civil responsibility for compensating and rectifying the consequences of the money that Dau had borrowed. Determining that the defendant Dau's criminal act was particularly serious, the court sentenced him to life imprisonment for the crime of abuse of trust and appropriation of property. In addition to the prison sentence, the court also ordered the defendant to compensate the victims for the entire amount of money appropriated, as stipulated by law.

According to the People's Police Newspaper