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

The Investigation Police Agency proposed to prosecute Nguyen The Kien, Nguyen Huu Tri, Le Dinh Nhan, Ha Thanh Hoa, Nguyen Thi An and Vu Vi Minh Tri for using computer networks, telecommunications 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 profile, Nguyen Huu Tri is a person with many years of experience in the business field.multi-level marketing, knowing that using the internet to provide false information to mobilize multi-level marketing methods is illegal. But in order to appropriate investors' money, the subjects organized and coordinated to establish and operate Hoang Long Mineral Investment Company Limited.

Notably in the case, defendant Nguyen Huu Tri said that Mr. Pham Dung Tien was the person behind the direction of all activities of Hoang Long company, but this defendant did not know how the specific discussions and directions were discussed.

Defendant Nhan (director, legal representative of Hoang Long Company) stated that the contract signed on September 19, 2016 to transfer 700,000 shares, equivalent to 35%, worth VND 40.6 billion, of Mr. Tien at An Vuong Mineral Joint Stock Company was a form to reassure investors so that they would believe that Hoang Long Company was investing in a real project. At the same time, it was to legalize the fact that Mr. Tien had previously received money from Hoang Long Company to execute investment cooperation contracts according to previously signed contracts.

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

He did not admit to participating in discussions and directing defendants in the case of establishing and operating Hoang Long Company. Because the company needs capital to exploit projects, it allows employees the right to provide partners with research and investment to jointly implement projects.

He did not know who provided the project documents to Hoang Long Company to print on catalogs, show at conferences... to promote and deceive investors. When the investigation agency determined that the amount of money Mr. Tien received was the amount of money misappropriated from investors, he pledged to hand it over to the investigation agency for handling according to the law.

The Investigation Agency concluded that the documents so far do not have a solid basis to consider Mr. Tien's criminal responsibility. Because apart from the above statements, there is no document or evidence proving that he participated 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 transfer of shares owned by An Vuong Company are civil transactions.

From its establishment until its suspension, Hoang Long Company earned nearly 695 billion VND. The amount of money Kien and his accomplices paid in principal, interest, commissions, and bonuses to investors was more than 626 billion VND and they appropriated more than 68.6 billion VND. Of which, nearly 10.6 billion VND was spent on salaries and company operations, and the defendants spent more than 33.7 billion VND...

Regarding the amount of money the defendants illegally benefited from committing crimes; the money that individuals kept and benefited from, such as Pham Dung Tien 23.6 billion VND, Do Doan Nang 47 million VND, Dong Kim Dung 389.3 million VND, the Investigation Agency believes that the origin is money appropriated from the victim (investor) and must be recovered.

Regarding the amount of money that Hoang Long company spends on salaries for employees, all activities originate from the investor's money. But these are actual expenses that the beneficiary has completed the work with the company without knowing that the source is the investor's money that was misappropriated, so it should be considered that this amount should not be recovered.