The Ministry of Public Security has just completed its investigation and transferred the entire case file of Nguyen The Kien (born in 1983 in Bac Giang, a farmer) and his accomplices to the Supreme People's Procuracy for review.prosecute.

The investigating agency has proposed prosecuting Nguyen The Kien, Nguyen Huu Tri, Le Dinh Nhan, Ha Thanh Hoa, Nguyen Thi An, and Vu Vi Minh Tri for the crime of using computer networks, telecommunication networks, and electronic means to commit acts of property appropriation (according to Clause 4, Article 290 of the Penal Code).

According to Nguyen The Kien's records, Nguyen Huu Tri has many years of experience in the business field.multi-level marketingKnowing that using the internet to spread false and untrue information to promote multi-level marketing schemes is illegal, the individuals involved nevertheless organized and coordinated the establishment and operation of Hoang Long Mineral Investment Company Limited to defraud investors.

Notably, in this case, defendant Nguyen Huu Tri claimed that Pham Dung Tien was the mastermind behind all the activities of Hoang Long Company, but he claimed he did not know the specific details of how these activities were discussed and directed.

The defendant Nhan (director and legal representative of Hoang Long Company) stated that the contract signed on September 19, 2016, to receive the transfer of 700,000 shares, equivalent to 35% and valued at 40.6 billion VND, from Mr. Tien in An Vuong Mineral Joint Stock Company was a tactic to reassure investors and make them believe that Hoang Long Company was genuinely investing in the project. It also served to legitimize Mr. Tien's prior receipt of money from Hoang Long Company to fulfill the investment cooperation contracts signed earlier.

Mr. Tien admitted to receiving 23.6 billion VND from Hoang Long Company to execute a contract between the two companies. The contract was merely a formality to register Hoang Long Company as a shareholder of An Vuong Company.

He denied participating in discussions or directing the defendants in the case to establish and operate Hoang Long Company. Because the company needed capital to develop projects, it allowed employees to provide information to partners for research and investment in project implementation.

He stated that he did not know who provided the project documents to Hoang Long Company for printing in catalogs, presenting at seminars, etc., in order to deceive investors. When the investigating agency determines that the money Mr. Tien received was embezzled from investors, he commits to handing it over to the investigating agency for processing according to the law.

The investigating agency concluded that the documents available so far do not provide a solid basis for considering Mr. Tien's criminal liability. This is because, apart from the aforementioned statements, there is no documentation or evidence proving his involvement in discussing and directing the defendants to establish and operate Hoang Long Company. Mr. Tien's receipt of money from Hoang Long Company for projects and the transfer of shares he owned in An Vuong Company were considered civil transactions.

From its establishment until its closure, Hoang Long Company earned nearly 695 billion VND. Kien and his accomplices spent over 626 billion VND on principal, interest, commissions, and bonuses for investors, and embezzled over 68.6 billion VND. Of this amount, nearly 10.6 billion VND was spent on salaries and company operations, and over 33.7 billion VND was used by the defendants...

Regarding the amount of money the defendants illegally profited from committing the crime; the money that individuals seized and benefited from, such as Pham Dung Tien (23.6 billion VND), Do Doan Nang (47 million VND), and Dong Kim Dung (389.3 million VND), the investigating agency believes that this money originated from the misappropriation of funds from the victims (investors) and therefore must be recovered.

Regarding the funds that Hoang Long Company spent on employee salaries, these activities all originated from investor funds. However, these were actual expenses incurred by the beneficiaries after they had completed their work with the company, unaware that the funds were misappropriated from investors. Therefore, consideration should be given to not recovering these funds.