On the afternoon of November 14, the People’s Court of Ho Chi Minh City pronounced a verdict on the case of a dispute over a property loan contract and a dispute over compensation for non-contractual damages between the plaintiff, Ms. Dang Thuy Trang (36 years old) and the defendant, Nguyen Thuc Thuy. Tien (25 years old, Miss World Peace 2021).
Accordingly, the jury decided to reject the plaintiff’s appeal and upheld the first instance verdict. This verdict takes effect immediately, Miss Thuy Tien officially wins the case.
According to the jury, based on the first instance case file, it was determined that the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant was a dispute over a property loan contract, which was incorrect. Since then, the appellate court said that the dispute between Ms. Trang and Thuy Tien was a claim for property and compensation for damages outside the contract.
In court, Ms. Trang said that she had handed over the amount of 15 billion VND to Miss Thuy Tien. However, Mr. Nguyen Quan Trong (Ms. Trang’s friend) is the person whose name is on the loan contract. Regarding the above content, the jury said that Ms. Trang’s name was not on the property loan contract, so she had no right to claim.
For the claim of compensation for damages outside the contract, the court found that there was no basis to consider. considered, the plaintiff’s appeal was not accepted.
According to the content of the case, Ms. Dang Thuy Trang said that in June 2017, because she needed money to participate in the 2017 Miss Southern contest, Miss Nguyen Thuc Thuy Tien proactively sought and borrowed from Ms. Trang the amount of 15 billion VND with the goal of reaching the top 3 finalists.
Concerned that Thuy Tien did not have money to pay Ms. Trang’s husband, she asked her friend Mr. Nguyen Quan Trong signed the debt confirmation document dated July 22, 2017 as the party lending money to Tien while Ms. Trang was only a witness. After that, Ms. Nguyen Thuc Thuy Tien signed the order and clearly stated that she had received the full amount of money within a one-year payment period.
Requested to repay the debt many times but was not paid by Tien. Ms. Trang made an appointment with Ms. Tien to come out. a coffee shop to talk. At this coffee shop, taking advantage of Ms. Trang’s loophole, Nguyen Thuc Thuy Tien arbitrarily snatched the debt confirmation certificate and tore it up.
Therefore, Ms. Trang sued to request Thuy Tien to pay the original debt of 15 billion. contract and compensate an amount related to mental damage; asked Tien to post a public apology on 3 newspaper pages.
Miss Thuy Tien had questions about not receiving money. Ms. Trang said she gave that money to the organizers of the contest. exam. When Tien contacted the contest organizers and determined that there was no such incident, she did not agree to repay the debt.
The person with related rights and obligations, Mr. Nguyen Quan Trong, presented and signed. Nguyen Thuc Thuy Tien’s debt receipt, but after that he did not give Ms. Trang or Tien any money. He also did not witness Ms. Trang giving money to Tien. He helped on the debt paper for Ms. Trang because of his friendship.
Regarding the delivery of money to Thuy Tien, Ms. Trang said that about an hour before Mr. Trong arrived, she had already delivered 15 billion VND. for the female beauty queen. When Mr. Trong arrived, Mr. Trong asked Tien if she had received enough money. Tien replied that she had received 15 billion VND. Mr. Trong then signed with the lender. However, according to Mr. Trong’s statement, after he signed the papers and left, he did not ask anything about whether Tien received the money or not.
Since then, the Go Vap District People’s Court has not accepted her request to sue. Dang Thuy Trang demanded that Nguyen Thuc Thuy Tien repay the loan of 15 billion VND.
Thinking that the first instance verdict was not consistent with the evidence in the case file, Ms. Dang Thuy Trang appealed. request the People’s Court of Ho Chi Minh City to amend the first instance judgment to accept her entire lawsuit request.
“
