The appellate court did not accept the appeal of tycoon Minh Khang and his wife.
(Baonghean.vn) - Mr. Nguyen Dinh Khang - Head of the Minh Khang Urban Area Project Management Board was sentenced to 30 years in prison by the court of first instance for two crimes. However, because he did not agree with the first instance verdict, Mr. Nguyen Dinh Khang filed an appeal claiming his innocence, requesting a review of the entire case.
On March 19 and 20, in Vinh city, the High People's Court opened an appeal trial for two defendants: Nguyen Thi Thu - Director of Minh Khang Trading Company Limited (Minh Khang Company) and Nguyen Dinh Khang - Head of the Minh Khang Urban Area Project Management Board for the crimes of "Fraudulent appropriation of property" and "Abuse of trust to appropriate property".
The trial was opened due to appeals from the defendants, victims, and related parties. There was also a protest to cancel the first instance judgment and appeal trial of the Supreme People's Procuracy.
Previously, at the end of September 2023, at the first instance trial, Nguyen Dinh Khang was sentenced to 20 years in prison for "Fraudulent appropriation of property" and 12 years in prison for "Abuse of trust to appropriate property", the total sentence was 30 years in prison; defendant Nguyen Thi Thu received a sentence of 12 years in prison for "Fraudulent appropriation of property" and 8 years in prison for "Abuse of trust to appropriate property", the total sentence was 20 years in prison, at the same time, the two defendants were jointly responsible for compensating the principal and interest to the victims.
Immediately after the first instance trial, defendant Nguyen Dinh Khang filed an appeal claiming his innocence, claiming that the first instance verdict was incorrect and requested a retrial. Defendant Nguyen Thi Thu filed an appeal hoping to reduce her sentence because she did not understand the law and was a housewife, so when her husband told her to sign, she did as she was told.
In addition, the authorized representative of Minh Khang Trading Company Limited filed an appeal stating that the transaction contracts were essentially capital contribution contracts, and the verdict's accusation was completely baseless, affecting the company's interests.
Regarding the appeal of the Supreme People's Procuracy in Hanoi, it requested an appeal review and annulment of the first instance judgment to clarify three contents related to the omission of criminals, the crime of Fraudulent appropriation of property, re-determining the number of victims as well as obligations related to the case and the calculation of interest in the compensation liability of the two defendants.
At the appeal hearing, the panel of judges questioned and clarified many issues related to the content of the case. Defendant Nguyen Thi Thu admitted her crime and wished for a lighter sentence. However, defendant Nguyen Dinh Khang still insisted that he was wronged and that the first instance verdict was incorrect.
Based on the case file as well as the testimony in court, the appellate panel concluded: Although the appeal of the two defendants was completely valid and followed proper procedures, at the trial the two defendants failed to provide additional evidence to prove that the above appeal was completely baseless and the first instance judgment convicting the two defendants was completely correct and not unjustified.
Regarding the authorized representative of Minh Khang Trading Company Limited, considering that the first instance judgment clearly pointed out the acts of fraud as well as the abuse of trust to appropriate the assets of the victims through capital contribution contracts, as well as the judgment forcing the two defendants to be responsible for compensating the victims, the appeal of the company is completely baseless. Here, the Panel of Judges also accepted part of the protest of the Supreme People's Procuracy in Hanoi regarding not forcing the defendants to pay interest to the victims and amended the first instance judgment regarding the calculation of interest.
For the above reasons, the appellate panel decided not to accept the appeal, partially amended the first instance judgment regarding the calculation of interest, and upheld the sentences for the defendants. Defendant Nguyen Dinh Khang was sentenced to 20 years in prison for “Fraudulent appropriation of property” and 12 years in prison for “Abuse of trust to appropriate property”, with a total sentence of 30 years in prison; defendant Nguyen Thi Thu received a sentence of 12 years in prison for “Fraudulent appropriation of property” and 8 years in prison for “Abuse of trust to appropriate property”, with a total sentence of 20 years in prison, and the defendants were ordered to compensate the victims for damages.
