The investigation agency admitted mistakes in the case of Miss Phuong Nga and Mr. Cao Toan My.

The Ho Chi Minh City Police Department has just decided to resolve the complaint against Mr. Cao Toan My (born in 1977, Director of Vina Cyber ​​Company, residing in District 3) - the person identified as the victim in the case of Truong Ho Phuong Nga (born in 1987, Vietnamese and Russian nationality, Miss Vietnam in Russia in 2007) and Nguyen Duc Thuy Dung (born in 1988) for fraud and property appropriation.

The investigation agency rejected Mr. Cao Toan My's complaint.

Accordingly, the Investigation Police Agency rejected Mr. Cao Toan My's complaint requesting to cancel the decision to temporarily detain and recover more than 2.5 billion VND from him, and accepted Mr. My's request to freeze an account in his name equivalent to the amount recovered, pending resolution according to civil dispute procedures.

Also according to this decision, if Mr. My does not agree, he has the right to appeal to the Chief Justice of the Ho Chi Minh City People's Procuracy within 3 days from the date of receiving the decision.

Previously, on September 6, 2018, the Investigation Police Agency issued a decision to recover more than 2.5 billion VND from Mr. Cao Toan My. This is the amount of money that during the investigation of the 2015 case, the defendant Nguyen Duc Thuy Dung admitted to embezzling 9.5 billion VND (out of a total of 16.5 billion VND), so she wanted to remedy the consequences and requested the Investigation Police Agency to use the defendant's savings book of more than 2.5 billion VND that was being seized by the Investigation Police Agency to return to Mr. Cao Toan My.

On November 9, 2015, the Ho Chi Minh City Police Department issued a decision to process the evidence and return more than 2.5 billion VND to the owner, Mr. Cao Toan My. On November 24, 2015, according to the decision to process the evidence, Mr. My received the entire amount of more than 2.5 billion VND.

However, in September 2018, the investigation agency decided to recover the amount of 2.5 billion VND. Disagreeing, Mr. Cao Toan My filed a complaint to the Director of the Ho Chi Minh City Police Department and the Director of the Ho Chi Minh City People's Procuracy. According to the complaint, Mr. My said that when returning this amount of money to him, the investigation agency determined that he was the owner. Now, if the money is recovered on the basis that this is Nguyen Duc Thuy Dung's personal money, it is necessary to clarify Dung's statement.

Responding to the complaint, the Head of the Investigation Police Agency admitted that there were errors in the procedural process when seizing and handling evidence of more than 2.5 billion VND, and that the defendant Nguyen Duc Thuy Dung changed her testimony and did not admit to having appropriated the 2.5 billion VND. At the same time, the Ho Chi Minh City People's Court requested additional investigation into this amount of money, so it was necessary to confiscate and handle it together when the case was concluded.

According to the accusation, around July 2012, Phuong Nga told Mr. My that she had many friends in the real estate industry and could buy a house at a price lower than the market price. Mr. My gave Ms. Nga 6 billion VND to buy a house in District 5, but Ms. Nga did not hand over the house.

Next, Ms. Nga told Mr. My that she had a house worth 16.5 billion VND in District 1. This time, Mr. My gave Ms. Nga an additional 10.5 billion VND. After giving Ms. Nga a total of 16.5 billion VND without a house, Mr. My filed a complaint with the police.

However, Phuong Nga denied Mr. My's accusation of defrauding her of 16.5 billion VND. Phuong Nga said that it was the money Mr. My voluntarily gave her because the two had a romantic relationship.

The case was brought to trial twice by the Ho Chi Minh City People's Court, but both times the panel of judges returned the case file after completing the interrogation. After the second trial, the panel of judges also changed the preventive measures against Truong Ho Phuong Nga and Nguyen Duc Thuy Dung, allowing both of them to be released on bail for investigation.

In the second trial (June 2017), the court released both Nga and Dung with a request for additional investigation of 9 contents.

In particular, in this trial, witnesses provided the court with surprising details such as letters written on plastic paper being transferred from outside to the prison and vice versa.

Because the investigation agency needs time to examine the handwriting and accompanying documents, the case and the defendants of Nga and Dung have been temporarily suspended. On June 14, the investigation agency resumed the investigation of the case.