(PLO) – The representative of the Procuracy proposed to punish Mr. Tran Qui Thanh 9-10 years in prison, Tran Uyen Phuong 5-6 years in prison and Tran Ngoc Bich 4-5 years in prison for the same crime of abuse of trust and appropriation of property.
On the afternoon of April 24, the People’s Court of Ho Chi Minh City continued the first instance trial of Mr. Tran Qui Thanh and his two daughters on charges of abuse of trust and appropriation of property.
The representative of the People’s Procuracy of Ho Chi Minh City proposed sentences for defendant Tran Qui Thanh from 9-10 years in prison, Tran Uyen Phuong from 5-6 years in prison and Tran Ngoc Bich from 4-5 years in prison for abuse of trust and appropriation of property. product.
Mr. Tran Qui Thanh. Photo: THUAN VAN
According to the Procuracy, based on the case files and testimonies of the defendants and related people in court, there is sufficient basis to determine:
From 2019 to 2020, Mr Tran Qui Thanh and two daughters through brokers lent money to Mr. Lam Son Hoang, Nguyen Huy Dong, Nguyen Van Chung and Ms. Dang Thi Kim Oanh at an interest rate of 3%/month.
Accompanying that is the requirement that the asset/project owner must sign a contract to transfer assets/shares of the project to hide the nature of the loan. When the property/project owner (borrower) fully fulfilled the obligation to repay principal and interest according to the resale agreement, the defendants cited reasons for not returning the property. The total value of appropriation was determined to be more than 1,048 billion VND.
Defendant Tran Qui Thanh is the person who directly worked, discussed with the borrower, broker and then announced that his two children, Tran Uyen Phuong and Tran Ngoc Bich, should bear the main responsibility; Next in charge are Tran Uyen Phuong and Tran Ngoc Bich.
The defendants concealed the loan by signing a capital contribution contract; There are changes in name changes, transfers, and even lawsuits in court. When the victim prepared enough money, the defendant used the excuse of not returning the property.
According to the Procuracy, the defendants were not sincere in their process, however, during the trial, through questioning, the defendants were aware of their actions and confessed honestly, so the Procuracy asked the jury to consider.
The defendants have extenuating circumstances: creating many jobs for workers, contributing to the local economic society, preventing the COVID-19 epidemic and overcoming the consequences of 185 billion VND… The defendants There is an aggravating circumstance of committing the crime twice or more. The Procuracy requested the jury to consider aggravation or mitigation, corresponding to each defendant’s behavior to consider the appropriate sentence.
