The Borrower, the Seller
At 2 p.m. this afternoon (April 23), the first-instance judicial panel for the case of “Breach of Trust, Embezzlement” against Mr. Tran Quy Thanh (born 1953, residing in Binh Duong province), Tran Uyen Phuong (born 1981), and Tran Ngoc Bich (born 1984, both residing in Binh Duong province and daughters of Mr. Thanh) continued with the questioning.
At the court session this morning, the judicial panel proceeded to question the “Breach of Trust, Embezzlement” behavior of Mr. Thanh and his daughters, concerning 4 plots of land belonging to Mr. Lam Son Hoang (the victim).
Mr. Tran Quy Thanh at the court session.
According to the accusation, Mr. Thanh instructed Tran Uyen Phuong and a group of employees to lend Mr. Lam Son Hoang 115 billion VND and to execute a fictitious contract to transfer 4 plots of land as collateral for the loan. Subsequently, Mr. Hoang prepared enough money to repay the debt as requested by Mr. Thanh, but Mr. Thanh’s side did not allow him to redeem the asset.
As the first person to answer the questions, Mr. Tran Quy Thanh stated that he did not establish a civil transaction for lending money with the 4 people (identified as victims), namely Messrs. Lam Son Hoang, Nguyen Van Chung, Nguyen Van Dong, and Ms. Dang Thi Kim Oanh.
In response to the judicial panel, Mr. Thanh said that when Mr. Nguyen Hoang Phu (the broker) brought Mr. Lam Son Hoang to meet Mr. Thanh, Mr. Hoang intended to borrow money at an interest rate of 3%. Mr. Thanh said that if he needed to borrow money, he should go to the bank to borrow it. Here, Mr. Thanh only buys and sells and does not lend money.
The presiding judge interrupted: “The defendant just said buying and selling. What kind of buying and selling?” – “Honorable court, Mr. Hoang said he wanted to sell 4 pieces of land,” Mr. Thanh replied to the judicial panel.
Mr. Thanh said that before Mr. Hoang came to meet him, through a broker, Mr. Thanh learned that Mr. Hoang wanted to sell 4 plots of land. Mr. Thanh was interested, so he agreed to meet Mr. Hoang.
Mr. Thanh testified to this point, and the presiding judge suddenly asked if Mr. Thanh wanted to confront him. Mr. Thanh quickly replied that he “wanted to,” and the presiding judge called Mr. Phu to confront him.
Mr. Thanh (left) and Mr. Phu (right) confronting each other in court. Photo taken through a screen.
Mr. Phu testified that he was informed by Mr. Hoang that he needed money and wanted to mortgage 4 plots of land. As suggested by Mr. Thanh, Mr. Phu brought Mr. Hoang to meet Mr. Thanh. After that, Mr. Phu learned that Mr. Thanh had lent money to Mr. Hoang, and Mr. Phu had also received brokerage money.
Mr. Phu further stated that Mr. Hoang told Mr. Phu that he had borrowed the money, while Mr. Thanh said he had bought 4 plots of land from Mr. Phu. “Mr. Hoang said it was a loan, while Mr. Thanh said it was a purchase and sale,” Mr. Phu stated in court.
In addition, Mr. Phu also testified that he received 3 billion VND from Mr. Hoang, which was the referral fee, divided into 2 installments and spent for personal use.
The presiding judge continued to call Mr. Lam Son Hoang to the stand to testify for confrontation. At this time, 3 gentlemen: Thanh, Phu, and Hoang stood before the judicial panel.
Mr. Thanh (left), Mr. Phu (middle), and Mr. Hoang (left) in court. Photo taken through a screen.
In response to the judicial panel, Mr. Hoang said that the relationship between him and Mr. Thanh was a loan, secured by 4 assets. According to Mr. Hoang, Mr. Phu said he had a relationship with Mr. Thanh, and to borrow money, he had to mortgage 4 assets through a transfer. Initially, Mr. Hoang wanted to borrow 100 billion VND, but when he learned that Mr. Thanh was taking a 3-month interest of 10 billion VND in advance, Mr. Hoang felt that the amount of money he needed was insufficient, so he increased the loan from 100 billion VND to 115 billion VND.
Mr. Phu also acknowledged that during the loan negotiation process between him and Mr. Thanh, there were no written documents. Only when the loan was processed were there procedures for transferring the 4 plots of land, registered in the name of Ms. Tran Uyen Phuong. Mr. Hoang borrowed 115 billion VND, signed the transfer in the morning, and received the money (through his account) in the afternoon.
Declaring a Lower Value Than the Land Value to “Save Money”
Both Mr. Thanh and Mr. Hoang confirmed that the amount of 115 billion VND in the indictment was correct, but the two men explained it differently. Mr. Thanh said that the 115 billion VND was the money he used to buy 4 plots of land from Mr. Hoang. On the contrary, Mr. Hoang said that the 115 billion VND was the money he borrowed from Mr. Thanh.
When both Mr. Thanh and Mr. Hoang were ‘arguing’, the presiding judge suddenly asked: Why did the contract state 28 billion VND when you borrowed or purchased 115 billion VND?
In response to the judicial panel, Mr. Hoang said that it was to save money on fees, upfront payments, etc., so he declared a lower value. Mr. Thanh said that since he bought 4 plots of land from Mr. Hoang but was willing to sell them back to Mr. Hoang when he had the money to buy them back, he declared a lower value so that Mr. Hoang would save money…
“Who is currently holding the land and the title deed?” – the presiding judge asked. In response to the judicial panel, Mr. Hoang said that he still had the land, while Mr. Thanh said that the title was in his daughter’s name.
“So the person holding the land is also the person holding the title deed, right?” – the presiding judge asked. Both Mr. Thanh and Mr. Hoang… remained silent. The presiding judge called Ms. Tran Uyen Phuong to the stand.
In response to the judicial panel, Ms. Phuong said that she had received information that Mr. Hoang was selling land and that her father
