Believing the neighbor's claim of "difficult family circumstances," the woman was bitterly deceived out of nearly 800 million VND.
Taking advantage of her acquaintance and the trust of her neighbors, Pham Anh Nguyet (33 years old, Nghe An) fabricated stories of family hardship to borrow money and gold, then embezzled it. Using deceitful words and sophisticated tricks, Nguyet trapped her victims, causing them to lose all their assets and suffer emotional distress. This case serves as a warning about gullibility and a costly lesson in asset management.
Fabricating stories about 'difficult family circumstances' to borrow money and gold.
The People's Court of Nghe An province recently opened a trial against Pham Anh Nguyet (33 years old), from Tam Dong commune (Nghe An province), for the crime of "Fraudulent appropriation of property." Due to having a young child, Nguyet was released on bail. During the two days of the trial, the female defendant attended the court alone. Meanwhile, Ms. Pham Thi Th. – the victim of Nguyet's scheme – sadly came to court with a few relatives.
There was no blood relationship between Ms. Th. and the defendant. They were just neighbors, acquainted when Nguyet came from the countryside to the city to rent a kiosk to sell fruit. Out of compassion and trust, the victim repeatedly lent the defendant money and gold. In return, the victim received blatant deception. Nguyet's actions not only caused Ms. Th. to lose her property but also disrupted her mental state and life.
.jpg)
Recounting how she was scammed by Pham Anh Nguyet, Mrs. Th. repeatedly shook her head in indignation. She met Nguyet when the latter rented a fruit stall on Dinh Le Street in Vinh City (formerly). They gradually became close friends. During their acquaintance, Nguyet saw that Mrs. Th. had assets and was easily trusting, so she hatched a plan to scam her.
Initially, Nguyet claimed her parents were ill and hospitalized, so she urgently needed money. Moved by compassion, Mrs. Th. readily lent her neighbor money to cover family expenses. Realizing her neighbor was easily deceived, Nguyet then used other excuses to trick Mrs. Th. into lending her money and gold.
Nguyệt deceived the victim by claiming that her parents in her hometown had given her a 22-hectare plot of forest land in Thanh Chương district (formerly) and that she was in the process of transferring ownership. Nguyệt said she needed money to complete the land transfer procedures. She claimed someone wanted to buy the land and promised to repay Ms. T. and give her some extra money after the sale. To gain the victim's trust, Nguyệt fabricated fake messages impersonating a real estate agent handling the land transfer and sent them to Ms. T. Believing the messages to be true, Ms. T. lent Nguyệt cash and gold on several occasions.
The investigating agency determined that from February 25, 2024 to April 16, 2024, Nguyet provided false information to defraud and steal 100 million VND and 10 gold bars from Ms. Th. (at the time, the gold was valued at over 691 million VND). The total value of the money Nguyet defrauded and stole was over 791 million VND.
When trust and kindness are exploited.
At the recent trial, the defendant admitted to the fraudulent act of stealing money and gold from the victim. The female defendant testified that because she saw that "the victim was easygoing in lending money and gold, and easily trusting, she repeatedly approached and defrauded her using the tactic of borrowing money and gold." To avoid detection, each time she borrowed money or gold, she wrote a receipt clearly stating the date, amount, and gold borrowed.
When urged by the victims to pay, the defendant occasionally set aside a small amount of money to give to them. The defendant claimed that all the money obtained through fraud and embezzlement was used to pay off debts for goods purchased and for personal expenses.
During the trial, the victim stated that the core reason she repeatedly lent money and gold to the defendant was trust. The defendant's claims that he was about to receive a large property from his parents further fueled her trust. The victim also stated that some of the money she was scammed out of was borrowed from others. Therefore, the defendant's actions have significantly impacted her life and mental well-being.
The victim felt upset and angry at the defendant's fraudulent behavior. Ms. Th. demanded that the defendant return all her assets so that she could stabilize her life and repay her debts.
During the trial proceedings, the panel of judges stated that the defendant had shown contempt for the law by repeatedly engaging in fraudulent lending of money and gold. The defendant, despite having full criminal responsibility, committed these acts of fraud due to greed. Through this trial, the panel of judges also reminded the public about the importance of managing their assets. They cautioned against lending money or valuables to others without thoroughly investigating and verifying the information provided.
Given the opportunity to speak her final words before the court adjourned to deliberate, the defendant expressed remorse for her crime and requested leniency. She explained her difficult family circumstances, noting that her fourth child was only a little over two months old, and that her other children were young and still in school. She promised to try to return the property to the victim. Prior to the trial, she had already compensated the victim with over 260 million VND.
The court determined that the defendant's actions violated the law and infringed upon the property rights of others protected by law. The defendant's criminal act significantly impacted public order and the lives of the people, therefore a severe sentence is necessary to deter and educate the defendant. However, several mitigating circumstances should also be considered, such as honest confession, remorse, and partial compensation for damages.
After a comprehensive review of the case, the panel of judges sentenced the defendant Pham Anh Nguyet to 11 years in prison for the crime of fraud and appropriation of property. Regarding civil matters, the court ordered the defendant to return the money to the victim (after deducting the amount already paid as compensation).
The trial concluded, and the defendant – released on bail – quietly left through a different exit to avoid encountering his former friend. They had once been close, helped each other, but in the end, that friendship was shattered along with the betrayal of trust. The case ended with a harsh sentence, but the lesson about trust and protecting one's assets remains valuable as a cautionary tale for all of us.
