Facing a proposed sentence of 19-20 years in prison, the former Deputy General Director of Van Thinh Phat Group cried and said he didn't dare meet his children.

On the morning of March 22, the trial of defendant Truong My Lan (68 years old, Chairwoman of Van Thinh Phat Group) and 85 other defendants continued with the defense arguments.

In his defense, defendant Ho Buu Phuong, former Deputy General Director in charge of Finance of Van Thinh Phat Group, argued that all company data was compiled and managed by the board of directors' office, and that he himself was not given access to it.

According to the defendant, during the investigation, he was recommended for prosecution for embezzlement, but he did not understand why he would commit embezzlement. However, after reading the indictment, he found that his actions as a whole were not overly serious or egregious.

" When the prosecutor proposed a 19-20 year prison sentence, I didn't know what to think anymore, I didn't know why. During my detention, I haven't been able to see my family, and I really want to see them. But after the proposal, I didn't dare see my children because I was ashamed," defendant Ho Buu Phuong said emotionally, weeping.

The defendant also requested the court to consider mitigating circumstances to reduce his sentence.

The final small link in the case.

Defending defendant Ho Buu Phuong, the lawyer argued that the sentence proposed by the Ho Chi Minh City People's Procuracy was too harsh compared to the extent and nature of the crime committed.

The People's Procuracy has requested the court to sentence defendant Ho Buu Phuong to 19-20 years in prison for the crime of embezzlement of property.

According to the lawyer, defendant Phuong admitted that she was wrong to collude with other defendants from the Van Thinh Phat group to "disburse funds" by creating share transfer contracts for loans at SCB Bank, causing serious consequences, and she requested to accept partial responsibility.

However, Ho Buu Phuong's role in the system and process of withdrawing money from SCB was limited and specialized, not as alleged in the indictment and charges.

Ho Buu Phuong is a highly specialized expert in auditing and securities. He holds a foreign degree in securities operations, which led to his recruitment by Ms. Truong My Lan into specialized professional roles at Van Thinh Phat.

The defense lawyer also argued that, at the trial, Ms. Truong My Lan asserted that her client was performing professional duties and did not have in-depth knowledge of internal affairs; in other words, she was unaware of important matters related to withdrawing money and the flow of funds, and that Ms. Truong My Lan only dealt with close associates.

Furthermore, when receiving company documents, Ho Buu Phuong did not know whether they were real or fake companies. Therefore, when giving price recommendations, Ho Buu Phuong relied on his personal knowledge and experience to assess and apply appropriate prices based on his subjective perception.

" Clearly, there was no specific collusion or direction from Ms. Truong My Lan in Ho Buu Phuong's work," the lawyer said, adding that, given the large scale and powerful, almost limitless resources of the Van Thinh Phat Group, Ho Buu Phuong's confidence in setting prices for other companies is understandable.

According to the lawyer, the plan to "release funds" from loans disbursed by SCB had existed before Ho Buu Phuong held the position of Deputy General Director in charge of finance at Van Thinh Phat Group.

Therefore, the defendant Phuong was merely following established practices at Van Thinh Phat without considering the rightness or wrongness of these actions. Therefore, the defense requests that the panel of judges and the prosecutor's office consider this point to reassess the circumstances and context of the crime committed by the defendant.

Defendant Truong My Lan and other defendants at the trial.

The defense lawyer also stated that Ho Buu Phuong was unaware that the funds entrusted to him for the fund disbursement were illegally borrowed money; and that he did not know what the Van Thinh Phat Group actually used this money for.

Therefore, the act of releasing funds is merely a pretext to temporarily transfer money without a clear purpose out of the borrowing company, and then recover it later.

The lawyer also requested the panel of judges to consider that the actions of defendant Ho Buu Phuong were merely a small, final link in the case, not an organized and sophisticated operation.

According to the indictment, Ho Buu Phuong was the Deputy General Director in charge of finance of Van Thinh Phat Group and Van Thinh Phat Investment Company from 2013 to July 31, 2020.

In addition to her professional financial duties, Phuong was also directed and assigned by Truong My Lan to coordinate with the Board of Directors' Office of Van Thinh Phat Group, Nguyen Phuong Anh, and related individuals to devise a plan to "disburse funds" from the money that SCB Bank had disbursed into the accounts of the beneficiary companies under a fictitious loan scheme, which Truong My Lan used for various purposes.

To disburse the funds, the defendants created fictitious share transfer agreements, in which the "shell" companies, receiving the disbursed funds, promised to purchase shares from individuals (who were hired to hold shares in other "shell" companies).

After signing the share transfer agreement and transferring the money, the individuals will go to the bank to sign the withdrawal documents; the company that received the promised shares only accounts for it under "accounts receivable," without going through the procedures of transferring ownership or transferring shares, thus avoiding tax liability and preventing detection of violations by the Tax authorities and Inspection agencies.

Whenever a large sum of money was needed, Nguyen Phuong Anh would report to and seek the opinion of Ho Buu Phuong to create contracts promising the transfer of shares. At such times, Ms. Lan would summon Ho Buu Phuong and the Head of the Board of Directors' Office of Van Thinh Phat Group (Ha Thuc Kim or Dang Phuong Hoai Tam) and Phan Chi Luan, an employee of the Board of Directors' Office of Van Thinh Phat Group, to hold a meeting to finalize the list, number of shares, and unit price of shares involved in the promised share transfer.

The Board of Directors' office then presents a list of companies and individuals who own shares and are expected to participate in the share transfer pledge.

Defendant Phuong suggested the unit price to be applied to the shares of each company based on an assessment of the establishment time, capital size, and existing assets (the unit price for newly established companies with no assets was between 10,000 VND/share and 30,000 VND/share) for defendant Lan's reference and decision.

Based on Ho Buu Phuong's instructions, Nguyen Phuong Anh created contracts promising to buy and sell shares between companies (under Phuong Anh's management) that had borrowed funds from SCB Bank, in order to withdraw the money after it was disbursed.

Ho Buu Phuong instructed Phuong Anh to work with Phan Chi Luan to develop a plan for promising to transfer shares, and together with Luan, review the companies (to avoid cross-ownership of shares between companies) and apply a relative share price based on the size, establishment time, and assets of the company that defendant Luan had established according to the instructions and formula of defendant Phuong.

The investigation results determined that: From January 1, 2018 to July 31, 2020, Nguyen Phuong Anh reported to and sought the opinion of Ho Buu Phuong to create contracts promising to transfer shares for 277 loans of 118 companies at SCB. As of October 17, 2022, the outstanding principal debt was nearly VND 216,983 billion and interest debt was over VND 99,228 billion. Of this amount, VND 190,771.5 billion was withdrawn through the creation of fictitious contracts promising to transfer shares.

Hoang Tho

Source