The prosecutor requested that model Tra Ngoc Hang pay 2.5 billion VND to her friend.

On December 9, the People's Court of Ho Chi Minh City opened an appeal hearing to consider the appeal of model Tra Ngoc Hang, 34 years old, the defendant in the case of Mr. Nguyen Quang Tan, 39 years old, demanding his money back.

The case file shows that in 2020, Ngoc Hang met Mr. Tan through the introduction of his girlfriend. Due to financial needs and mutual trust, Mr. Tan transferred the right to use some land plots in Da Teh district, Lam Dong, to the female model as collateral to borrow 13.2 billion VND from the bank.

According to the plaintiff, after the bank disbursed the loan, Ngoc Hang kept 2.5 billion VND, and used the rest for himself. The two parties agreed: Hang was obliged to pay the interest on the principal of 2.5 billion, and he paid the interest on the remaining amount. However, after a while, Ngoc Hang did not pay the interest, affecting the entire loan.

Mr. Tan then completed the procedures for Hang to pay off the entire loan and asked her to return 2.5 billion VND, but she did not agree. Not only that, she also posted incorrect information on Facebook, changing the nature of the problem, according to Mr. Tan.

Therefore, he filed a lawsuit, asking the court to force Ngoc Hang to pay 2.5 billion VND.

During the case settlement process, Ngoc Hang stated that in 2020, Mr. Tan needed a large amount of money for business but had bad debt at the bank, so he asked her to help him borrow. Because she also needed capital, she borrowed for Mr. Tan in the above manner.

In early 2020, the bank disbursed her 11.2 billion VND; of which Mr. Tan received 9 billion. The two parties agreed that each person would pay the corresponding interest, Mr. Tan had to pay in full and on time to avoid her account being in bad debt. If she were in bad debt, she would not be responsible for paying the principal.

A month later, Mr. Tan asked to borrow another 2 billion VND, after the disbursement, he received 1.5 billion, the rest was borrowed by her. However, while waiting for the disbursement of the next loan, Mr. Tan did not pay the interest on the previous loan, forcing her to pay the interest on the entire 11.2 billion VND loan of the plaintiff.

Because Mr. Tan was late in paying interest, the bank reported her as having bad debt and filed a lawsuit. This also caused another bank - where she borrowed money to buy a Mercedes GLC 250 - to repossess the car.

It was not until November 2020 that Mr. Tan found someone to pay off the loans and asked her to transfer the previous land plots.

According to Ngoc Hang, Mr. Tan "seriously violated the agreement between the two parties" in letting her fall into bad debt. Furthermore, she had to pay interest on Mr. Tan's behalf many times, so according to Article 378 of the 2015 Civil Code, her obligation for the loan could be offset.

In August, the Thu Duc City People's Court held a first-instance trial and accepted Mr. Tan's lawsuit, forcing Ngoc Hang to pay 2.5 billion VND. According to the Trial Panel, Mr. Tan was the one who actually paid the 13.2 billion VND loan to the bank, the female model received 2.5 billion VND in the loan, so Mr. Tan has the right to claim it back.

During the trial, Ngoc Hang submitted a document stating that Mr. Tan promised to settle her bad debt and buy her a car to prove that there was an agreement between the two parties that "in case Mr. Tan did not pay interest, causing Ms. Hang to have bad debt, she would not pay both principal and interest on the amount of 2.5 billion VND". After reviewing the entire content of the document, the Trial Panel concluded that "there was no agreement as Ngoc Hang presented". Therefore, she must return 2.5 billion VND to the plaintiff.

Disagreeing with this verdict, Ngoc Hang appealed, requesting the appellate court to amend the first instance judgment in the direction of not accepting the plaintiff's request.

At court today, model Tra Ngoc Hang did not attend the hearing, authorizing a representative to attend. Presenting the appeal, the defendant requested the Trial Panel to annul the first instance judgment because they believed that the first instance court violated the procedure: it did not summon enough people with related rights and obligations; Mr. Nguyen Quang Tan did not have the right to file a lawsuit.

Responding to the Trial Panel, the defendant's representative said that Ngoc Hang signed a contract to mortgage the land plots to borrow money from the bank to help Mr. Tan, but there was no loan agreement between Hang and Mr. Tan.

According to the defendant, during the first instance trial, the court did not summon the bank representative to participate in the proceedings, which was a shortcoming. However, the Trial Panel explained that because the defendant admitted to signing the loan contract and receiving 2.5 billion VND from Mr. Tan, summoning the bank was unnecessary.

Explaining that during the first instance trial, Ngoc Hang admitted to receiving 2.5 billion VND from Mr. Tan and it was recorded in the verdict, but denied it in court today, the defendant's representative said that it was because "the defendant was mentally disturbed before".

The lawyer protecting Mr. Tan's legal rights and interests disagreed with the defendant's request and maintained the viewpoint presented at the first instance. The plaintiff argued that the first instance judgment was appropriate and the evidence was clear, so he requested the Trial Panel to reject Ms. Hang's appeal.

In stating his views on the case, the representative of the prosecutor's office stated that the court of first instance had reviewed and clarified the contents; the defendant appealed but did not provide additional documents or new evidence to prove his request; the court's first instance judgment was appropriate and well-founded, so he requested the Trial Panel to uphold it.

After consultation, the Trial Panel decided to extend the deliberation until December 18 to issue a verdict.