Le Nam, 36, stood trial for fraud in Hanoi on 8/7. His alleged accomplices, Nguyen Thi Hanh, 43, and Nguyen Viet Anh, 54, both Hanoi residents, also face charges.
The alleged fraud stemmed from a loan of 106 billion VND that Tan Tan Joint Stock Company took from a bank but couldn't repay. The bank sued Tan Tan, demanding the transfer of all mortgaged assets.
In 12/2017, the bank sold the debt to Tan Hung Phat Limited Liability Company, headed by Nguyen Thi Xuan Hong.
Knowing Hong needed help to quickly resolve the lawsuit and reclaim the assets, Viet Anh falsely claimed connections with high-ranking officials who could help. He requested 5 billion VND from Hong for "networking."
In 12/2021, Viet Anh claimed to have found a back channel to senior officials and introduced Hong to Hanoi-based business couple Nguyen Dinh Nghia.
In the last two weeks of 2021, Hong transferred a total of 48 billion VND to the Nghia couple. Upon receiving the funds, they contacted Hanh.
Hanh then contacted Ma Hieu Thien, who promised to find connections to resolve the issue for 10 billion VND.
Thien connected Hanh with Do Van Chien, who was introduced as working at the central office of the communist party of Vietnam.
Thien and Chien promised to resolve the matter within two weeks, or two months at the latest, with a "favorable outcome" for Hong's company.
Hanh relayed this to the Nghia couple, who transferred her 10 billion VND. Hanh, however, only gave 4 billion VND to Thien and Chien, promising to transfer the rest upon successful resolution.
Chien then took Hanh to Ho Chi Minh City to negotiate with Tan Tan's lawyer, but the talks failed.
Unable to deliver on his promise, Chien returned one billion VND to Hanh, claiming 500 million VND had been spent on gifts for networking. Hanh demanded Thien return 2.5 billion VND, but he refused.
Driving a car to the company's door to receive two boxes of money
To further pursue the matter, Hanh was introduced to Le Nam, then an official at the supreme people's court.
Nam claimed he could ensure Tan Tan won the lawsuit, demanding 11 billion VND. Hanh relayed this to the Nghia couple. Similar to her dealings with Viet Anh, Hanh only gave Nam 6 billion VND, promising the rest upon success. She kept 5 billion VND for personal expenses, the indictment states.
Nam later demanded an additional 20 billion VND. Hanh instructed him to collect it directly from the Nghia couple's company in Cau Giay, Hanoi.
The Nghia couple had three employees count and pack 20 billion VND into two cardboard boxes, which they carried from their office to Nam's car waiting outside, placing them in the back seat, the indictment states.
In 7/2022, Nam demanded the remaining 5 billion VND from Hanh. Having spent it all, she transferred two plots of land to him as compensation. In early 2023, realizing Nam couldn't deliver, Hanh repeatedly demanded a refund, but he refused.
Hong reported the incident to the police in 8/2023.
After being summoned, Nam instructed Hanh to "take the blame," promising to "handle things from the outside and take care of her children." He told her to change her SIM card. They then communicated using burner phones.
Hanh confessed to the police. Nam denied receiving money or promising to resolve the commercial dispute.
However, recordings provided by the victim revealed Nam discussing returning the money to Hong if unsuccessful. The recordings also documented Nam coordinating his testimony with Hanh.
Two employees who carried the boxes identified Nam as the driver. The 20 billion VND consisted of eight stacks of 200,000 VND bills, 36 stacks of 500,000 VND bills, and eight bundles of 500,000 VND bills. The police conducted a reenactment of the money counting, packing, and loading.
During the investigation, Nam's wife returned 18 billion VND.
Viet Anh denied the accusations. Based on recordings from Hong, the prosecution confirmed Viet Anh's involvement in defrauding her of 10 billion VND.
Ma Hieu Thien repeatedly ignored police summonses, sold his house, and moved his family. Investigators have been unable to question him. Chien denied knowing Hanh or Thien, receiving money, or involvement in the scheme. The investigation into Thien and Chien is ongoing.
The prosecution determined the Nghia couple simply relayed information from Hanh and Nam to Hong and were not involved in the fraud.
Due to new developments during the trial, the Hanoi people's court returned the case for further investigation.
Thanh Lam
