trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nayJudgment no. 15/2021/HS-ST dated 18/03/2021 on obtaining property by fraud

trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay PEOPLE'S COURT OF COMMITTEE OF TOWN Q, PROVINCE Q

JUDGMENT NO. 15/2021/HS-ST DATED MARCH 18, 2021 ON OBTAINING PROPERTY BY FRAUD

On March 18, 2021, at trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay head office, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay People’s Court of Town Q, province Q heard a first instance trial of criminal case No. 03/2021/HSST dated January 18, 2021 under trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Decision to Bring trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Case to Trial No. 16/2021/QDXXST-HS dated March 4, 2021 against:

Bui Thi N, born on May 5, 1982 in Q town, Q province; Place of residence:Hamlet N, commune T, town Q, Quang Ninh province; Occupation: Freelance worker; Education level: 12/12; Ethnicity: Kinh: Gender: Female; Religion: none; Nationality: Vietnamese; father: Mr. Bui Van M and mother: Ms. Tran Thi Ph; husband: Dam Quang V, 2 children: trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay eldest was born in 2011, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay younger one was born in 2012; antecedents: none; trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant was wanted and he surrendered on October 12, 2020, he has been put in custody temporarily and appeared in court.

- Aggrieved parties:

1.Mr. Nguyen Van A, born in 1977; Address: commune N, district B, province Q1.

No appearance in court.

2.Mr. Vu Van T, born in 1967; Address: zone L, ward D, district K, city H. No appearance in court.

3.Ms. Bui Thi Hoa N, born in 1973; address: Collective 115, TDP3, ward D, district H, city H. No appearance in court.

4.Ms. Lam Thi My Th, born in 1997; address: hamlet 9, commune VT, district V, province H. No appearance in court.

5.Mr. Ngo Quang T3, born in 1988; address: hamlet V, commune A, district B, province H. No appearance in court.

6.Ms. Bui Thi D, born in 1960; address: zone 3, ward P, town Q, province Q.

Appearance in court.

- Witnesses:

1.Ms. Tran Thi P, born in 1958; address: village C, commune T, town Q, province Q.

No appearance in court.

2.Mr. Dam Quang V, born in 1974; address: Nui Thua village, commune T, town Q, province Q. Appearance in court.

3.Ms. Bui Thi H2, born in 1967; address: zone 3, ward P, town Q, province Q. No appearance in court.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

According to trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay documents available in trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay case file and trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay progress at trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay trial, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay contents of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay case are summarized as follows:

Bui Thi N is a freelance worker and is not duly authorized to do paperwork for Vietnamese people to work or study abroad. However, from trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay end of 2017 to trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay end of 2018, N gave a lot of information such as having relationship with people working in trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Embassy, ​​helping many people to go to Korea, promising to be able to do paperwork in a short time, making many people believe, gave trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay documents (passports, ID cards, photos, household registration of those wishing to go abroad) and money for N to carry out procedures for labor export and study in Korea, then appropriated property, in specific as follows:

- From November 2017 to April 2018, N received an amount of VND 80,000,000 from Mr. Nguyen Van A (born in 1977, residing at: commune N, district B, province Q) and VND 50,000,000 from Mr. Vu Van T (born in 1967, residing in: area L, ward D, district K, city H) with documents to do paperwork for Mr. A’s relatives to study abroad, and Mr. T to work in Korea. Past trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay promised time limit, N could not fulfill it, making many excuses for delay. In April 2019, after Mr. A and Mr. T demanded to return trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay money many times, N paid Mr. A 10,000,000 VND, paid Mr. T 15,000,000 VND, and N appropriated trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay rest of 70,000,000 VND from Mr. A and 35,000,000 VND from Mr. T, so they reported it to trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay police agency.

- During trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay period from April to May 2018, N received trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay documents and trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay amount of VND 50,000,000 from Ms. Bui Thi D (born in 1960, residing at: zone 3, ward P, town Q, province Q) to complete paperwork for Mrs. D to work in Korea. Unable to keep trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay promise, N gave trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay reason that Ms. D had to spend more money to go to Korea, Mrs. D did not agree, she resolutely demanded trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay money to be returned. By August 2018, N paid 42,000,000 VND, she appropriated 8,000,000 VND for personal use.

- In October 2018, N received from Ms. Bui Thi Hoa N (born in 1973, residing at:

ward D, district H, city H) documents and trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay amount of 3,000 USD (equivalent to 69,855,000 VND); in November 2018 and December 2018, N received trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay documents and 1,000 USD (equivalent to 23,255,000 VND) and 46,515,000 VND from Ms. Lam Thi My Th (born in 1997, residing at: Hamlet 9, Vi Thang commune, Vi T district, V province) to do paperwork for Ms. N and Ms. Th to work in Korea. Also during this time, N received from Mr. Ngo Quang T3 (born in 1988, residing in: village V, commune A, district B, province H) an amount of USD 1,000 (equivalent to 23,255,000 VND) and an amount of VND 43,000,000 to do trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay paperwork for some of Tai's acquaintances, then N appropriated and used trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay entire amount.

trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay handover of money between trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties and N as above all has receipts or invoices via bank accounts.

trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Expertise Conclusion No. 182/GDTL dated January 6, 2020 of Criminalistics Department of province Q indicates that: trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay handwriting and signatures in trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay documents to be assessed (money receipts, appointment papers, pledges submitted by trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties) and comparison forms (signatures, handwriting of N in N's voluntary statements) are written by one person and signed by one person.

At trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay investigating agency, N declared: N acted as a broker for people going to Korea to work and study for an acquaintance through social networks with trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay account name Ton That T4 (accommodation information in Ho Chi Minh City), unknown background, N has never met Thuyet, N does not know Thuyet’s face, does not remember phone number, in order to benefit 5,000,000 VND per one profile. N declared that he had transferred all trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay money and documents of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties: An, Tuan, and Dong, and transferred trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay documents of Ms. Hoa Na and Ms. Th to Thuyet by sending them via coaches (no proof of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay transfer). Thuyet cut off contact with N while he did not complete paperwork  for any profile. trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay investigation process has no basis to clarify for trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Facebook account named Ton That T4, so there is no basis to accept N's testimony on this matter.

By trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay time of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay first-instance trial, defendant N paid Mr. Nguyen Van A enough money, Mr. A had not requested anything. N returned a part of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay appropriated money to some other aggrieved parties, in specific: N paid Mrs. D 42,000,000 VND, Mr. T 29,000,000 VND, Ms N 10,000,000 VND, Ms Th 20,000,000 VND, but N did not pay trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay remaining amount, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties all demanded trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant to return.

In trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Indictment No. 04/CT-VKSQY dated January 15, 2021, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay People's Procuracy of Q town prosecuted Bui Thi N for trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay crime of "Obtaining property by fraud" under point a, clause 3 Article 174 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Criminal Code.

At trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay trial, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay representative of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay People's Procuracy of Q town upheld trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay prosecution decision and proposed trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Trial Panel to:Declare defendant Bui Thi N guilty of "Obtaining property by fraud”; pursuant to point a clause 3 Article 174, point b, s clause 1, clause 2 Article 51, point g clause 1 Article 52 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nayCriminal Code in Viet Nam, sentence Bui Thi T to 7 years 6 months in prison; confiscate 1 old Xperia mobile phone; regarding civil liability, it is proposed to force defendant N to return to trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay unpaid appropriated amount: 8,000,000 VND to Ms. D, 21,000,000 VND to Mr. T, 60,000,000 VND to Ms. Hoa Na, 50,000,000 VND Ms. Th, 69,000,000 VND to Mr. T3.

Aggrieved parties who did not appear in trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay court hearing all requested for trial in absentia. In trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay request for trial in absentia, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties suggested: Ms. Hoa Na asked trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant to return trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay amount of VND 60,000,000, Mr. Ngo Quang T3 asked trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant to pay VND 69,000,000, Mr. Vu Van T asked trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant to pay 21,000,000 VND, Ms. Lam Thi My Th asked trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant to pay 50,000,000 VND. Ms. D, who appeared in court, asked N to pay 8,000,000 VND and seek commutation of sentence in favor of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant.

trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant agreed to pay trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties back trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay amount as requested above, with no money available, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant would pay trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay damages later.

trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant said trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay last word, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant was aware of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay crime and petitioned for commutation of sentence.

JUDGEMENT OF trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay COURT

Based on trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay contents of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay case and documents available in trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay case file that have been litigated at trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay trial, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Trial Panel shall determine as follows:

[1] Regarding procedural acts and decisions of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Investigative Police Agency - Q Town Police, Q Town People's Procuracy, investigators, and procurators in trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay course of investigation and prosecution, they have strictly complied with trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay competence and procedures regulated in trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nayCriminal Procedure Code in Viet Nam; trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant or aggrieved parties have no opinion or complaint about trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay act or decision of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay legal proceeding bodies and presiding officers. Therefore, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay procedural acts and decisions of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay legal proceeding bodies and presiding officers have been made legally.

[2] Regarding trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay absence of certain participants in trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay proceedings: trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay absentee has been duly served with trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay court documents and summons, and trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties have all filed a request for trial in their absence; trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay request also states trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay claim of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved party; 2 witnesses did not appear in court without a just cause. Considering that there were testimonies of these people taken during trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay investigation process, so their absence does not interfere with trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay trial. Therefore, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Trial Panel shall conduct trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay trial in trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay absence of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay participants in trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay proceedings according to Article 292, Article 293 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Criminal Procedure Code.

[3] Regarding trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay criminal act of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant: During trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay investigation and at trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay trial, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant confessed to trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay crime, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant's testimony was consistent with trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay testimonies of aggrieved parties, witnesses, expertise conclusions of signatures and handwriting; consistent with trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay content of money receipts, money payment slips, account statements, and data showing trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay content of messages between trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant and trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties; consistent with other documents and evidence in trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay case file that have been verified at trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay court hearing.

There are substantial grounds for holding that: From November 2017 to December 2018, in T commune, Q town, Q province, Bui Thi N worked as a freelance worker, although she was not duly authorized to do paperwork for Vietnamese citizens to work or study abroad, N used deceitful tricks to lie to trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties that she had relationship with authorities and was able to help them do trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay paperwork to go to work or study abroad in Korea, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties believed that and they had submitted documents and repeatedly gave money to Bui Thi N and their money had been appropriated, in specific: 80,000,000 VND was appropriated from Mr. Nguyen Van A, already repaid; 50,000,000 VND was appropriated from Mr. Vu Van T, 29,000,000 VND already repaid, 21,000,000 VND unpaid; 50,000,000 VND was appropriated from Ms. Bui Thi D, 42,000,000 VND already repaid, 8,000,000 VND unpaid; 69,855,000 VND was appropriated from Ms. Bui Thi Hoa N, 10,000,000 VND already repaid, 59,855,000 VND unpaid; 69,765,000 VND was appropriated from Ms. Lam Thi My Th, 20,000,000 VND already repaid, 49,765,000 VND unpaid; 66,255,000 VND was appropriated from Mr. Ngo Quang T3.

trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay total amount of money that defendant Bui Thi N appropriated from 06 aggrieved parties is 385,880,000 VND, 181,000,000 VND has been already repaid, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay unpaid amount is 204.880,000 VND.

Bui Thi N’s act has sufficient elements to constitute trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay crime: “Obtaining property by fraud”, as prescribed in point a clause 3 Article 174 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Criminal Code, as stated in trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Indictment No. 04/CT-VKSQY dated January 15, 2021 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay People's Procuracy of Q town against trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant. This prosecution is grounded, guilty person is rightly convicted.

Article 174 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Criminal Code stipulates:

“1. A person who uses deception to obtain another person's property which is assessed at from VND 2,000,000 to under VND 50,000,000 or property assessed at under VND 2,000,000 in any of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay following circumstances shall face a penalty of up to 03 years' community sentence or 06 - 36 months' imprisonment:

3.This offence committed in any of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay following circumstances carries a penalty of 7 - 15 years' imprisonment:

a) trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay property obtained is assessed at from VND 200,000,000 to under VND 500,000,000;”

[4] trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant's behavior is dangerous to society, infringes on trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay property rights of many  aggrieved parties, causes disorder in trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay locality, and arouses trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay ire of local residents. trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant intentionally used fraudulent tricks, claiming that she had relationship with authorities, was duly authorized to complete paperwork for studying abroad or working abroad, to gain trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay confidence of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties to appropriate trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay properties from them.

{After appropriating trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay money, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant spent them on personal purposes and deliberately fled away. trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant's guilty act should be punished with severe imprisonment, commensurate with trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay nature and severity of consequence caused by trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant’s wrongful act, for particular education and general prevention of similar offenses.

[5] Regarding trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggravating and mitigating circumstances:

- Regarding aggravating circumstances: trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant commits trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay crime twice or more and must bear trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggravating circumstances specified at Point g, Clause 1, Article 52 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Criminal Code;

- Regarding mitigating circumstances: trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant turned herself in, expressed cooperative attitude, voluntarily returned part of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay money to trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties; Bui Thi D, one of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties, at trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay trial, asked for a commutation of sentence in favor of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant, so trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant may enjoy extenuating circumstances specified at Points b and s Clause 1 and Clause 2 Article 51 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Criminal Code.

[6] Regarding additional penalty: Considering trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant's financial hardship, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Trial Panel will not apply additional penalty in form of fine to trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant.

[7] Regarding civil liability: trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties asked trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant to pay trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay unpaid amounts, Ms. Hoa Na claims 60,000,000 VND, Mr. Ngo Quang T3 claims 69,000,000 VND, Mr. Vu Van T claims 21,000,000 VND, Ms. Lam Thi My Th claims 50,000,000 VND. At trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay trial, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant agreed to return trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay above amounts at trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay request of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties, thus trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Trial Panel forces trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant to return to trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties these amounts.

[8] As for Mr. Le Sy H3 and Ms. Vu Thi N3 who introduced with Mr. An and Ms. D that N had trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay ability to complete paperwork for people to go to Korea, then Mr. An and Mrs. D reached agreement with N in person; Mr. H3 and Mrs. N4 did not know about N's criminal act, did not receive any benefits. Therefore, there are insufficient grounds to identify H3, N4 as accomplices of N.

[9] Regarding exhibits:

During trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay investigation, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant voluntarily handed over an old Xperia mobile phone, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Investigative Agency solicited trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay expertise for "data recovery and extract".trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Expertise Conclusion No. 1284/C09-P6 dated March 23, 2020 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Institute of Criminal Science affiliated to trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Ministry of Public Security concludes: it is not possible to recover or extract data stored in trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay phone because trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay phone is broken or damaged. At trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay trial, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant confessed that he used this phone to contact Ton That T4 and trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties to discuss procedures for them to go abroad. Considering that trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay phone has been broken and is no longer worth using, it should be confiscated and destroyed.

[10] Regarding court fee: trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant must bear first instance criminal court fee and civil court fee as prescribed by law.

For trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay foregoing reasons, 

DISPOSITION

Pursuant to Article 260 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Criminal Procedure Code;

[1] Declare: Defendant Bui Thi N guilty of “Obtaining property by fraud”

Pursuant to Point a, Clause 3, Article 174; Points b and s Clause 1 and Clause 2 Article 51; point g, Clause 1, Article 52 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Criminal Code; sentence defendant Bui Thi N to 07 (seven) years in prison, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay prison term begins from trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay date of detention on October 12, 2020.

[2] Regarding civil liability:

Pursuant to Article 48 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Criminal Code; Articles 584, 585, 586, 589, and Article 357 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm naytrực tiếp bóng đá hôm nay. Force defendant Bui Thi N to return trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay unpaid appropriated money to trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties, in specific:

21,000,000 VND (Twenty one million dong) to Mr. Vu Van T; 60,000,000 VND to Ms. Bui Thi Hoa N (Sixty million dong); 50,000,000 VND to Ms. Lam Thi My Th (Fifty million dong); 8,000,000 VND to Ms. Bui Thi D (Eight million dong); 69,000,000 VND to Mr. Ngo Quang T3 (Sixty nine million dong).

From trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay date on which trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay judgment takes legal effect, if trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay judgment creditor files a request for judgment enforcement but defendant Bui Thi N fails to pay trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay full amounts to trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties, she must pay trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay interest on trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay corresponding late payment amount corresponding to trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay late payment period, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay interest that has been incurred on trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay late payment according to Articles 357 and 468 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Civil Code.

In case trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay court judgment or decision is enforced as per regulations in Article 2 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Law on enforcements of civil judgments, trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay judgment creditor and judgment debtor are lawfully allowed to reach an agreement on judgment enforcement, request judgment enforcement, be subject to voluntary execution or coercive judgment enforcement in compliance with regulations in Articles 6, 7, 7a, 7b and 9 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nayLuật thi đá bóng trực tiếp dân sự 2008 Số hiệu 26/2008/QH12, and trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay effective period of judgment enforcement shall comply within provisions in Article 30 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Law on enforcement of civil judgments.

[3] Regarding exhibits:

Pursuant to point a clause 2 Article 106 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Criminal Procedure Code;

Confiscate and destroy 01 (one) broken mobile phone, no screen, white back cover with trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay words XPERIA printed thereon.

(trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay condition and features of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay exhibit are shown in trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay minutes on handover of exhibits and properties dated March 10, 2021 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Sub-department of Civil Judgment Enforcement of Q town).

[4] Regarding court fees and trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay right to appeal:

Pursuant to clause 2 Article 136, Article 331 and Article 333 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay Criminal Procedure Code andNghị quyết 326/2016/UBTVQH14 quy định về mứcdated December 30, 2016 of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay National Assembly Standing Committee on court fees and charges;

Force defendant Bui Thi N to pay 200,000 VND (Two hundred thousand dong) of first-instance criminal court fee and 10,400,000 VND (Ten million four hundred thousand dong) of first-instance civil court fee.

trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay first-instance trial was open to trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay public, with trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay appearance of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant and trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved party, Bui Thi D. trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay defendant and trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved party who made appearance in court may rightfully appeal this judgment within 15 days from trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay judgment announcement. Notify trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay aggrieved parties who made no appearance in court (Mr. Nguyen Van A, Mr. Vu Van T, Ms. Bui Thi Hoa N, Ms. Lam Thi My Th, Mr. Ngo Quang T3) of trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay right to appeal within 15 days from trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay date on which trực tiếp bóng đá việt nam hôm nay judgment is duly served or publicly posted./.