BGH on Legal Tech When the software replaces the lawyer

Status: 06/17/2021 6:46 a.m.

Anyone who wants to draw up an individual contract goes to a lawyer. That’s how it was before. In the meantime, however, this can also be done online, without legal assistance. The BGH is now examining whether this is permissible. What are the sticking points?

By Kerstin Anabah and Pia Brandsch-Böhm

What is the specific case about?

The publisher Wolters Kluwer offers the legal document generator “Smartlaw”. With the help of the software, private individuals and companies can create and then purchase individual legal documents, such as rental agreements. To do this, customers have to answer 30 to 40 questions. The whole thing was “modeled on the conversation with the lawyer”, according to the original advertisement.

Wolters Kluwer is not admitted to the bar and is not licensed to provide legal services. The Hamburg Bar Association has therefore sued the publisher (Az. I ZR 113/20). She sees the Legal Tech offer as an anti-competitive violation of the Legal Services Act. It regulates who is allowed to provide legal services – for example lawyers or debt collection companies.

How have the courts decided so far?

The Cologne Regional Court gave the Bar Association in law. It saw in the contract generator a violation of the Legal Services Act. Wolters Kluwer appealed against this to the Cologne Higher Regional Court – with success. According to the Cologne Higher Regional Court, this is not a legal service, as there is no human (service) performance. The documents would be created by software. There is no customer contact because the customer operates the software himself. In addition, no legal examination of the individual case is necessary, since the program runs according to a fixed routine and a situation is only inserted into a given grid.

Have there already been judgments in similar cases?

As early as 2019, the Federal Court of Justice ruled on a legal aid program in the ruling on “kleineermiete.de”. At that time the question was whether a rental price calculator represents a collection or a legal service. With this online calculator, customers could see by entering their data whether they were paying too much rent and immediately defend themselves against it. For this purpose, the program directly commissioned the company behind it to enforce the rights. The BGH has declared this rental price calculator to be permissible.

How the first civil senate decides in the case of the contract generator is open. The industry for such offers is booming. The ruling is therefore likely to be another important step towards greater legal certainty.

Dispute over ECB bond purchases Get together!

As of: June 9th, 2021 6:05 p.m.

It is understandable that the EU Commission is reacting to the Karlsruhe ECB ruling with proceedings against Germany. But that won’t resolve the dispute. Only the courts themselves can do that. A comment from Frank Bräutigam, ARD legal editors If anyone at Karlsruhe’s Schlossplatz had hoped that the high waves after the Karlsruhe ECB judgment of May 2020 would fizzle out silently, they were disappointed today. The EU Commission is initiating infringement proceedings against Germany because of a ruling by the Federal Constitutional Court. ´ That has never happened before. The relationship between Karlsruhe and Luxembourg has always been somewhat tense. But this is now a unique escalation.

Do not lose sight of questions of democracy

The starting point of the Federal Constitutional Court on EU issues is absolutely correct and important. To see that the legal limits remain an important currency at the EU level. Because one must not lose sight of the individual voter, i.e. questions of democracy. Because the individual states have not given up all their competences to the EU. With its “yes, but” approach, the court has achieved a lot in several rulings since the financial crisis in 2012 at the latest. In this specific case of the ECB bond purchase, pulling the emergency brake, accusing the ECB and ECJ of arbitrary action, went too far.

The EU Commission had to react

That was not proportionate: in terms of content, but also with a view to the possible role model effect for other states such as Poland or Hungary. What happens there in terms of content within the judiciary is of course not comparable to Germany. Nevertheless, there is this bare result: The German court does not adhere to what the ECJ says. Then why should we do this? The fact that, from its point of view, the EU Commission must therefore react and initiate a procedure – which is understandable.

Dilemma for several actors at the same time

But you also have to be aware that if you think through the process started today, it will lead several actors into a real dilemma. First of all, the federal government, which now has to take a position as a first step. What is she supposed to do? Somehow signal an independent court to correct its judgment or take other action? And in the last step, the ECJ would decide on a breach of contract. Who? Yes exactly. One of the arguing actors. He would be a kind of judge in his own case. Would that lead to a good solution?

Take “cooperation relationship” at its word

Arguing over who “has the last word” is almost always devastating. In private life, in politics and also within a network of national and European courts. It is the last thing the citizens of the EU need in these times. If the “cooperation relationship” between the courts can be heard in many speeches, this must be taken literally. Mind you: the courts cooperate with each other. Not the courts with the state and the EU. They are supposed to strictly control these two. The fact that there is often still room for improvement at the ECJ on this point has expressly contributed to this conflict.

It is the courts’ turn

An example from the two companies at issue here shows that cooperation is fundamentally possible. Because the First Senate of the Federal Constitutional Court (the Second Senate acts in the ECB conflict) has shown with important rulings from 2019 that Karlsruhe and Luxembourg can achieve control of national and European fundamental rights in the interests of the citizens together. That means: the current situation can only be defused by the courts themselves. Not from the Federal Government or the EU Commission. The actors from the judiciary know each other. Well, actually. You have to pull yourself together. It is unclear what the one solution to the specific dispute should look like, but there has been no lack of creative ideas in Karlsruhe or Luxembourg for many decades.

Editorial note Comments generally reflect the opinion of the respective author and not that of the editors.

Court separates claim from administrative case vụ In 2015, Mr. Tien (Mrs. Ngoc’s husband) won the auction of two stalls in Cao Lanh City’s cage and signed a contract with the management board of the market to sell sports equipment. After that, he asked to switch to selling cosmetics and was approved by the Finance – Planning Department, so he bought more than 500 million dong of goods for sale. More than a month later, he had his license to sell cosmetics revoked. The market management board of Cao Lanh city, Dong Thap province seized the goods of Mrs. Dang Thi Bich Ngoc and her husband. Photo: YC In July 2016, Chairman of the City People’s Committee Cao Lanh fined Ms. Ngoc 2.5 million dong for doing business as a household business without a business household registration license in accordance with the law. Ms. Ngoc complained but was denied. Because she still sells cosmetics, the chairman of the City People’s Committee again fined her 3 million dong. Ms. Ngoc sued all three of the above decisions. Then she closed the counter, waiting for the trial, the market management board unlocked the stall by itself, seizing all the cosmetics. In 2018 and 2019, the People’s Court of Dong Thap province and the High People’s Court in Ho Chi Minh City both accepted the petition of Ms. Ngoc and her husband, declaring to cancel all three decisions. The claim was separated by the court into another case. Accepted for nearly two years, brought to trial three times and then suspended According to the instructions of the two judgments above, Ms. Ngoc and her husband went to sue the Chairman of the People’s Committee and the People’s Committee of Cao Lanh City for compensation. Specifically, regarding the compensation claim, the first instance court said that it was not related to administrative decisions but to civil business and commercial relations, so it should be separated into another case. As for the appellate court, it clearly states that “the fact that the market management board officers counted, counted and sealed the goods Ms. Ngoc was selling, if causing damage to Ms. Ngoc, she has the right to sue these people to demand compensation for the damage. by another case”. Since then, she has sued the president and Cao Lanh City People’s Committee for compensation as instructed by the two courts. However, the Cao Lanh City People’s Court, after accepting this case for nearly two years and bringing it to trial three times, suspended it on the grounds that the lawsuit claim had been settled by a legally effective judgment. Previously, at the trial on March 25, 2021, the trial panel paused the trial and transferred the file to the police agency to see if there were signs of criminal offense when losing her box… As soon as she received the decision, Ms. Ngoc appealed the request to cancel the suspension decision and asked the court to continue the settlement. According to Ms. Ngoc, the court’s suspension is to deprive her of her right to sue, which is an illegal act. At the same time, Ms. Ngoc also filed a complaint against the judge who was handling the case because she thought that the judge was not objective, lacked transparency, and issued an illegal suspension decision. Court accepted the reason there was “misunderstanding” Talking to PV, the judge dealing with the case said that Ms. Ngoc must sue the market management board about a contract dispute or a civil dispute for compensation for damage from the contract. The judge analyzed: Ms. Ngoc asked the Chairman of the People’s Committee and the People’s Committee of Cao Lanh City to pay compensation due to the administrative decision, the appellate judgment of the High People’s Court was resolved (rejecting the request because the above decisions were not the original reason). directly causing damage to Ms. Ngoc). Reporter asked: “If so, why is the court still accepting, after nearly two years and three times of trial, it has been suspended?”. The judge admitted the court also had a “misunderstanding”. After a period of research, she realized that the court stopped her and allowed her to sue again with another case. Court suspension: Wrong or right? Commenting on this issue, Dr. Nguyen Van Tien, Deputy Dean of the Civil Faculty of Ho Chi Minh City University of Law, said that: According to the notice not to prosecute the case of Cao Lanh City Police and the decision to settle the complaint of the Procuracy. It was found that due to the direction of the Chairman of the People’s Committee and the People’s Committee of Cao Lanh City, the market management board came to seize the goods. Therefore, the fact that Ms. Ngoc sued the Chairman of the People’s Committee and the People’s Committee of Cao Lanh City is grounded. However, even if the market management board follows the instructions, they are still the ones who directly seize the goods leading to damage, so the market management board must be responsible. The Finance – Planning Department (with written consent for Ms. Ngoc to convert the counter into a cosmetic business) together with the Market Management Board to seize the goods, should also be jointly responsible. According to Dr. Tien, the general rule is that whoever causes damage must compensate. Therefore, Ms. Ngoc can sue the Chairman of the People’s Committee, the People’s Committee of Cao Lanh City, the Market Management Board and the Finance – Planning Department to jointly compensate for damage caused by the illegal seizure of goods. Dr. Tien said that the court’s suspension on the grounds that Ms. Ngoc’s request was resolved was not convincing. In this case, the court needs to clarify the cause-and-effect relationship between the decision-making and direction of the City People’s Committee and the seizure of goods by the market management board. It can be seen that the cause of the incident was partly from the direction of the City People’s Committee, but the market management board did not voluntarily implement it. Therefore, Ms. Ngoc’s lawsuit to request the defendants to jointly compensate must be considered an unresolved claim as determined by the first-instance and appellate judgments in the previous administrative case. Sued additional market management board, why still suspend? Before filing the lawsuit, I reported the seizure of goods to the police to investigate the crime of openly appropriating property. However, the police and the People’s Procuracy of Cao Lanh city said that the market management board performed the tasks assigned by the People’s Committee of Cao Lanh City, with no signs of crime. Therefore, my wife and I sued the Chairman of the People’s Committee and the People’s Committee of Cao Lanh City. My third additional claim is that the Chairman of the People’s Committee, Cao Lanh City People’s Committee, Market Management Board, Finance – Planning Department (under Cao Lanh City People’s Committee, participating as a related person) must jointly compensate usually the amount of goods illegally seized (nearly 500 million dong), not a claim for compensation caused by an administrative decision. Mrs DANG THI BICH NGOC

French luxury brand Chanel

Lost in the “trademark war” with Huawei

According to Reuters, this trademark lawsuit originated in 2017. At that time, Huawei applied to the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) for the registration and protection of its computer hardware trademarks. The logo of the trademark is two intertwined half rings.

But Chanel objected to this. According to the report, Chanel said that the design of Huawei’s trademark is similar to the trademark of Chanel registered in France, that is, the design of two half-rings intertwined horizontally. According to reports, Chanel’s trademark is used on its perfumes, cosmetics, jewelry, leather goods and clothing and other products.

In 2019, the European Union Intellectual Property Office rejected Chanel’s objections, saying that the two trademarks were not similar, and there was no possibility of causing public confusion.

But it’s not over yet. The report mentioned that the French luxury goods group subsequently filed an appeal with the European Union General Court in Luxembourg.

On April 21, 2021 local time, the court decided to reject the appeal.

“The graphic trademarks in dispute are not similar.” The court ruling said, “In particular, Chanel’s trademark curve is more rounded, thicker, and the direction is horizontal, while the Huawei trademark is vertical. Therefore, the EU General Court concluded. The conclusion is that there is a difference between the two.”

The report also mentioned that Chanel can appeal this judgment to the European Court of Justice, the European Court of Justice.

According to Reuters, the trademark dispute highlights how luxury brands are trying to protect their iconic logos and trademarks, which usually symbolize luxury, fashion and uniqueness.

Seeing this logo, some netizens said that this logo is very similar to the initial letter H of Huawei, and not similar to the logo of Chanel.

Netizen: Chanel can sue paperclip

“It’s better to say that black and white are used, and the similarity is 100%.”

“Trouble Chanel not to rub Huawei’s enthusiasm”

“I thought it was a power socket,

I never thought Chanel would go there.”

“Chanel can sue paper clips”

Source: Shangguan News integrated from China Mobile, World Wide Web, Observer, etc.

“Shen” reported hot commodities

(Click on the picture to enter the corresponding product interface to purchase)

Former Minister Vu Huy Hoang denied the blame on his subordinates Responding to the Panel’s question, the reason for having autographs signed by former Deputy Minister Ho Thi Kim Thoa, the defendant Vu Huy Hoang said that the Ministry of Industry and Trade has a working regulation, specifying each field and each consensus. director in charge. When handling related cases, the person in charge directly responsible, in case the person in charge is absent, can consult with the leader to handle it instead. “Although the assigned people take initiative in their field, if they consider it necessary to consult with members of the board of directors and leaders like me, they actively consult with me. I can only consult when I am. I was asked to attend. Likewise, in important meetings, the person in charge who is away can ask someone else to hold the meeting. “ , the defendant Vu Huy Hoang explained. Former Minister of Industry and Trade Vu Huy Hoang and his accomplices in court. (Photo: VNA) In court, the former Minister of Industry and Trade also denied that he blamed his subordinates. “I apologize to VKS, reading the indictment this morning saying that I do not accept responsibility within my scope, I reaffirm before the Panel, I have no opinion to blame, blame other individuals for the What is happening if I am the person directly in charge. I am personally responsible for the things I am in charge of, directing and being consulted. for others, including subordinates “ , the defendant Vu Huy Hoang explained. Talking about the responsibility for the damage to the State property, the defendant Vu Huy Hoang still affirmed that, according to the regulations, the head is responsible for general but the tasks are clearly assigned to each leader. “Me and the other members are in general management, can not find out. The enterprise is proactive in production and business, Sabeco has been equitized, the management is through the assistant department. Today after listening to the news. believe, I see this project is not an important work of the Ministry, not to say of the State, the Minister cannot grasp all “, Mr. Hoang presented. “Golden land” falls into private hands because the Ministry of Industry and Trade pressured? In this case, Mr. Phan Dang Tuat, former Chairman of the Board of Directors, State Capital Management Board for the period 2012-2015, signed a number of investor selection documents. Mr. Tuat was not examined for penal liability and attended the trial as a person with related rights and obligations. Previously, in 2007, Sabeco cooperated with Sabeco Land to implement the project at 2-4-6 Hai Ba Trung (District 1, Ho Chi Minh City), but it was not financial enough because the amount of land use fee was 1,236 billion. copper. Although in 2012, the Government issued a Resolution 26 on divestment from outside the industry, but Mr. Vu Huy Hoang (former Minister of Industry and Trade), Ho Thi Kim Thoa (former Deputy Minister of Industry and Trade, was in hiding) continued to direct Sabeco invests in real estate projects. On April 23, 2014, Sabeco issued official dispatch No. 10 proposing for Sabeco to implement the project with a group of new investors to establish Sabeco Pearl, Sabeco also transferred the above land use right to Sabeco Pearl. In the process of implementing mistakes, Sabeco divested cheap capital, leading to gold land falling into private hands, the state suffered more than 2,700 billion VND losses. In response to the panel, Mr. Tuat admitted that Sabeco is the only corporation known as rich but has no office and has to hire. Rent is also budgetary. Sabeco considers its responsibility to quickly get an office. When Sabeco Land withdrew from the 2-4-6 Hai Ba Trung project, new investors were excited. Mr. Tuat signed the official letter No. 10 with reference to other companies in the industry and trade. After the approval of the Ministry of Industry and Trade, Sabeco meets with investors, drafting the contract. “I only attended the first time when the parties greeted each other, then discussed the implementation of the contract, conditions, terms … The negotiation of the project is based on the old project” Mr. Tuan said. Referring to the document sent to the People’s Committee of Ho Chi Minh City to agree to Sabeco Pear to fulfill financial obligations, Mr. Tuat said that after completing the dossier with the investor, Sabeco made a joint venture cooperation contract and submitted it to the People’s Committee for project implementation. Mr. Tuat admitted that signing the official letter was not authorized because at that time, the legal representative was absent. “Sabeco submitted the application but more than a month later, there is no reply. The Ministry of Industry and Trade urged us to quickly implement the project … “ Mr. Tuat explained. Mr. Tuat added: “In Sabeco it is customary to just go to meetings about land and call me. All the city documents sent to Sabeco on land are sent to me, I attend ”. Mr. Tuat also said that before issuing an official letter to Sabeco Pear to fulfill its financial obligations, Sabeco had to report to the Ministry of Industry and Trade. In response to the judge’s questions about his responsibilities related to the case, Mr. Tuat replied: “I think in the process of working, the only mistake is being too aggressive and enthusiastic. Should have waited time. Because the Ministry of Industry and Trade pressured. The Ministry also urged the late payment fines of 18.5 billion each year. After 1 month of submitting the application, we did not respond, we were in a hurry… ”. Present at the court, the representative of Me Linh Square Joint Stock Company (formerly Sabeco Pearl) said that the unit is currently managing the “golden land” above. Shareholders participating in the company since April 2017 have not been prosecuted for the case for less than 1 year, since then the land has been vacant, not deployed, causing great damage to the company. “We consider the records, all documents of the state are true, true, we believe in them. When we attended court, it was discovered that there were many incidents happening between different regulatory agencies, not related to us. Ask the court to look and protect our rights ” This taste added.

Opening the argument, lawyer Dinh Anh Tuan, defending defendant Tran Trong Mung (former General Director of TISCO) said that in this case, the procedural agency should consider the responsibility of the Ministry of Industry and Trade. Vietnam Industrial Construction Corporation (VINAINCON) to defendants who are leaders of TISCO and leaders of Vietnam Steel Corporation (VNS) so that they choose VINAINCON as a subcontractor.

The defendants at the trial.

According to the defense lawyer, one of the reasons why the leaders of TISCO and leaders of VNS accepted VINAINCON because there is a document signed by the Ministry of Industry and Trade signed by a leader of the ministry. Documents of the Ministry of Industry and Trade show that VINAINCON is an enterprise of the ministry with good capacity. According to lawyer Tuan, in this incident, the main responsibility belongs to the Ministry of Industry and Trade. TISCO and VNS only have to bear joint responsibility.

During the impeachment process, the representative of the Procuracy determined that the defendant Tran Trong Mung was responsible for the case when he did not terminate the contract with China Metallurgical Science, Technology and Trade Corporation (MCC), although the This industry has violated. Specifically, in 2007, TISCO and MCC signed a package EPC contract, costing 160 million USD to build a metallurgical line. MCC then violated the contract, did not build and demanded a price increase.

The Procuracy said that, at that time, defendant Mung must terminate the contract with MCC, withdraw the advance, report to the authorized person to cancel the bid and re-bid in accordance with the law. . However, the defendant Mung instructed to negotiate at the request of MCC, and at the same time signed a written request to increase the price of part C (construction and installation) in the EPC Contract.

In addition, the defendant Mung also introduced and accepted VINAINCON as a subcontractor. Because VINAINCON is not capable enough, in 2011 the project had to stop construction, so far the project has not been completed.

The defense lawyers at the trial.

Debating about TISCO not stopping the contract with MCC, lawyer Tuan cited many legal documents, the defendant Mung signed many documents urging MCC to implement the project. Defendant Mung also signed a document to the Ministry of Industry and Trade and VNS with the content “Request the Ministry of Industry and Trade to report to the Government for permission to terminate the EPC contract with the MCC contractor. Require MCC to return the deposit and reimburse damages ”. But this is not accepted by the authorities.

Under the EPC Contract, if there is a dispute, TISCO and MCC will settle in an arbitration court in Singapore. Therefore, TISCO signed a contract with Kenvil Chia law firm of this island nation to advise and received a reply with the content “The termination of the contract cannot be taken lightly and should only consider the termination if there are no more options. choose another one ”.

Since then, the defendant Mung chose to continue the contract, change the price of construction and installation and change the price of the EPC contract according to the provisions of Circular 09/2008 of the Ministry of Construction.

Also according to lawyer Tuan, the change in the form of part C contract from package to unit price contract was not given by defendant Mung. Even the defendant Mung once opposed this because the change in unit price is that the next quarter’s price is higher than the previous quarter, causing the project to raise the price, the contractor is not actively working.

Lawyer Tuan said that his client, the defendant Mung has only part of the responsibility in introducing VINAINCON as a subcontractor, so he asked the Panel to transfer the charge to the defendant Mung from the crime of “Violation of regulations on management. and the use of State property causes loss and waste “to the crime of” Lack of responsibility, causing serious consequences “.

Lawyer Tran Van Tao, defending defendant Tran Van Kham (former Chairman of the Board of Directors cum General Director of TISCO) who is the successor to the defendant Tran Trong Mung said that the impeachment view of the representative of the Procuracy towards the body. His boss is too heavy. Lawyer Tao acknowledged that all the acts of defendant Kham were just for the purpose of expecting the project to be completed soon.

According to Tao, defendant Khâm received the project when the project had been implemented for 24 months with MCC general contractor not under construction. The project was also asked for permission by the defendant and the Ministry of Industry and Trade, the Government allowed to separate part C assigned to VINAINCON for construction and increase the investment for part C. Therefore, the Procuracy said, the defendant Khâm’s actions to prolong the performance of the contract, increase the contract price, separate Part C from the contract, agree that VINAINCON is incapable of performing the contract is incorrect.

The representative of the Procuracy exercises prosecution rights at the trial.

During the impeachment process, the representative of the Procuracy determined that defendant Khâm has the role of organizing the offense. With his powers as Chairman of the Board of Directors cum General Director of TISCO, as the successor to the defendant Mung directing the project implementation, defendant Kham knows that the EPC contract is a package contract, without grounds for price adjustment, but still directs to advise, propose and sign the decision to adjust the total project investment structure, including the provision for part C of the Contract to increase by 15.57 million USD.

Defendant Kham also signed the fourth adjustment annex with MCC agreed to separate Part C from the contract, at the same time signed a three-party subcontract, agreed to assign incompetent VINAINCON and other real subcontractors. Part C is in the form of an adjustable unit price contract, TISCO organizes the implementation and assumes all risks without a legal basis, not in accordance with the provisions of the contract.

Today (April 15), the People’s Court of Ba Ria – Vung Tau province brought the case of “fraudulent appropriation of property” occurred at Sao Vang Investment Joint Stock Company (referred to as Sao Vang company for short, address number 257). Ba Cu, Ward 4, Vung Tau City) to trial. This is a fraud case with the amount of hundreds of billion dong.

In court, the defendant Pham Thi Thu Ha (SN 1983, hometown of Ha Tinh, residing in Vung Tau City) was prosecuted by VKSND of the same level for fraudulent appropriation of property.

Concerning this case, the mastermind – defendant Huynh Thi Ngan Trang (SN 1983, resident of Xuan Loc district, Dong Nai province) has fled and is being wanted.

Defendant Pham Thi Thu Ha at the trial this morning (April 15). Photo: Quang Hung

From the early morning, hundreds of people who were the victims, who were involved in the case have been in court, crowded in the hall and the railing outside the courtroom.

Some victims also brought law books to prepare for the argument in court.

However, after the examination of the composition of the court, the Panel decided to postpone the trial for the reasons: many victims are absent, the person with related obligations and the victim requested the postponement … , delay after more than 1 month, will be reopened.

According to the list announced by the secretary, this trial the court summoned more than 144 victims and more than 400 people with related obligations. However, only more than 100 victims were present and more than 134 persons with related rights and obligations participated.

After the decision to postpone the trial, many defendants petitioned to send the People’s Court to return the files to further investigate the case, they said that the procedural agency had “overlooked” the crime, many related issues in the case. the judgment has not been satisfactorily resolved …

Appropriated nearly 224 billion dong of 433 customers

According to the case file, from 2012 to June 2017, Huynh Thi Ngan Trang – Chairman of Sao Vang and Pham Thi Thu Ha – held the positions: Director, Deputy General Director, The treasurer of Sao Vang Company deceived 433 customers to steal nearly 224 billion dong.

Trang and Ha confessed that during the above period, Sao Vang company invested in projects, bought shares at a loss, had no revenue, but both still maintained to pay profits to customers, taking money from the customer pays the customer, the latter pays the first.

Hundreds of people were harmed, who were on duty involved in court early in the morning. Photo: Quang Hung

Many participants in court leave the courtroom after the decision to postpone. Photo: Quang Hung

In December 2016, Sao Vang Company terminated the investment activities of projects, but continued to mobilize capital from customers for investment cooperation. By June 2017, although Sao Vang Company could not afford to pay, Trang continued to deceive customers through the service staff, customer department to appeal and entice customers by offer a profit rate of 22-30% for them to deposit money into the company and then appropriate a portion of paying for previous customers.

In order to carry out the above behavior, Trang and Ha have made false documents on the charter capital contribution of member companies in cash; taking advantage of the position of General Director, concurrently Chairman of the Board of Directors, Trang instructs employees to spend money for the “virtual” project investment page, no revenue.

After that, Trang pays a certain amount of money to maintain the cash fund of Sao Vang, to ensure the payment of principal and profit for customers, pay commissions for employees and operating expenses. …

With the above deceitful tricks, Trang fraudulently appropriated the money of 433 customers with the amount of more than VND 223 billion. Specifically, Sao Vang original amount has not yet paid to these customers is more than 407 billion VND; the amount of profit paid is more than 174 billion dong; the amount of commissions for employees is over 9 billion.

For Pham Thi Thu Ha’s behavior, the investigation and police determined that between 2010 and 2016, Ha was a shareholder, holding important positions in the company, playing a role in helping for phishing page with the above tricks.

From 2015 to 2016, Ha helped Trang directly sign 70 investment cooperation contracts and 7 maturity contracts with 67 customers, and signed annexes of investment cooperation contracts with fixed profit agreements. Payable to customers 27.6% / year, expected profit from 15-36% / year, with commitment to pay profit in advance to customers, regardless of business results.

Consequently, 67 customers trusted and were “trapped” to pay Sao Vang, with the appropriated amount of nearly 24 billion VND.

The defendants petitioned for the return of additional investigation files because they believed that the case “omitted the crime”. Someone brought law books to court to prepare for the argument. Photo: Quang Hung

At the investigation agency, Trang confessed all the criminal acts committed by Trang. Ba Ria – Vung Tau Provincial Police CSDT has prosecuted the defendant, applied measures to prevent leaving the residence, delayed exit for Trang due to her pregnancy, child nursing under 36 months old.

However, on March 26, 2020, Trang fled the locality, so the investigating agency issued a pursuit decision, suspended the investigation for the accused and decided to separate the criminal case for criminal acts. Trang’s defendant, after being caught, will be handled later.

At the same time, the police agency ordered distraint, suspend transactions for assets such as land use rights, shares related to Trang and Sao Vang company.

Defendant Ha confessed his crime, but said that everything was directed by Trang, did not intentionally commit fraud to appropriate property with Trang.

However, with documents and evidence gathered together with testimony during the settlement of the case, the police agency determined that Ha was an accomplice with Trang on the crime of appropriating property.

In this case, the investigation agency also worked with 13 shareholders of Sao Vang company and identified some shareholders who did not participate in the company’s operations, did not know Trang and Ha committed criminal acts. insufficient grounds to consider criminal liability.
Meanwhile, some other shareholders denied the responsibility and role related to the defendant’s criminal acts, so when the Trang is arrested, the investigation agency will continue to consider and handle.