Pham Cong Danh was sentenced to 20 years, while Tram Be received a 4-year prison sentence.

On August 6th, the Ho Chi Minh City People's Court continued the trial of defendants Pham Cong Danh (born in 1965, former Chairman of the Board of Directors of VNCB Bank and Thien Thanh Group), Tram Be (former Chairman of the Credit Committee of Saigon Thuong Tin Commercial Joint Stock Bank - Sacombank), and 44 others for intentionally violating State regulations in economic management, causing serious consequences.

Based on the case file and the court proceedings, there is sufficient evidence to determine that after taking over Dai Tin Bank, Pham Cong Danh renamed it Vietnam Construction Bank (VNCB) and managed it inefficiently, causing heavy losses. This forced the State Bank of Vietnam to place VNCB under special management, requiring all transactions exceeding 5 billion VND to be reported to the supervisory team.

The trial clarified Pham Cong Danh's role as the person who directly met with bank leaders and, through Nguyen Viet Ha, connected with leaders of TPBank, BIDV, and Sacombank to obtain loans.

Phan Thanh Mai, in his role as General Director of VNCB, was assigned by Danh the task of balancing VNCB's funds. Mai used deposits from the primary market and other banks as collateral for 29 loans.

Tram Be received a four-year prison sentence and was allowed to reclaim his assets.

Mai Huu Khuong and Hoang Dinh Quyet acted on the instructions of Pham Cong Danh and Phan Thanh Mai to process loan applications at banks in order to withdraw money from VNCB.

Nguyen Viet Ha, Director of Loc Viet Fund, repeatedly traveled to Ho Chi Minh City to meet with Danh and Mai to discuss and finalize a plan to create fake documents for the issuance of bonds by Thien Thanh Group in order to withdraw money from the bank. Ha's testimony is consistent with the testimonies of Nguyen Kim Cam Van, Vu Viet Minh Quan, Nguyen Hoai Thanh, etc. There is sufficient basis to determine that Nguyen Viet Ha assisted Pham Cong Danh in causing a loss of 903 billion VND.

Using his authority, Tram Be directed Phan Huy Khang to lend Pham Cong Danh 1,800 billion VND, even though the borrowing companies lacked collateral, had not yet determined a loan plan, had not reviewed the loan application, and had not supervised the borrowers' misuse of the funds.

Phan Huy Khang, acting on instructions from Tram Be, lent Danh 1,800 billion VND. Despite numerous irregularities in the loan process, Khang continued to lend Danh the money, assisting Danh in withdrawing funds from the bank and using them illegally.

Regarding the group of defendants who acted as nominees to help Pham Cong Danh borrow money from three banks, causing losses of over 6,000 billion VND to VNCB Bank, when determining the sentence, the Panel of Judges considered the defendants' sincere confessions, their status as salaried employees, and the fact that they did not benefit from the scheme. Furthermore, many defendants come from families with revolutionary contributions. Therefore, mitigating circumstances should be considered for these defendants.

Regarding the 4,500 billion VND, the Trial Panel determined that this was the property of Pham Cong Danh and therefore needed to be recovered to mitigate the consequences of the case. However, the investigating agency had already recovered 2,371 billion VND. Therefore, the Trial Panel decided to order Pham Cong Danh to return 2,121 billion VND to CB (formerly VNCB).

The court determined that the 4,500 billion VND was money belonging to Pham Cong Danh.

Regarding the Prosecutor's proposal to recover 6.126 billion VND from Sacombank, BIDV, and TPBank to return to CB Bank to mitigate the consequences, the Panel of Judges determined that these three banks had collected the debt in accordance with the law and consistent with the State Bank of Vietnam's assessment, therefore no repayment was necessary. The Court argued that the amount that Mr. Danh used after borrowing from the three banks should be recovered, not the amount that the three banks used VNCB's deposits to offset the debt.

Consequently, the court ordered the recovery of thousands of billions of dong from various sources identified as evidence in the case, including over 1,600 billion dong from BIDV, over 200 billion dong from Sacombank, 502 billion dong from TPBank, over 194 billion dong from Mr. Tran Quy Thanh, and 600 billion dong from Ms. Hua Thi Phan…

Regarding the relationship between Pham Cong Danh, BIDV, Sacombank, and related parties, the court decided to separate it into different civil cases and will resolve it when the parties request it.

In addition, the court decided to lift the seizure of the house at 591 An Duong Vuong Street, An Lac A Ward, Binh Tan District, returning it to Ms. Vien Tu Anh (the sister-in-law of defendant Tram Be) as it is not related to this case. Regarding the house at 601 Hong Bang Street, Ward 6, District 6, owned by Tram Be, the representative of the Ho Chi Minh City People's Procuracy also requested the court to consider lifting the seizure for Tram Be.

Phan Thành Mai received a 30-year prison sentence.

Based on the above findings, the court sentenced defendant Pham Cong Danh to 20 years in prison, with a combined sentence of 30 years from phase 1 (since the maximum sentence is 30 years); Phan Thanh Mai to 12 years in prison, with a combined sentence of 22 years from phase 1 (meaning Mai must serve a total of 30 years); Tram Be to 4 years in prison; and Phan Huy Khang to 3 years in prison. The remaining defendants were sentenced to terms ranging from 3 years suspended to 30 years in prison.