Judgement no. 99/2021/DS-PT dated march 16, 2021, regarding dispute about distribution of estate

HIGH PEOPLE’S COURT OF HO CHI MINH CITY

JUDGEMENT NO. 99/2021/DS-PT DATED MARCH 16, 2021, REGARDING DISPUTE ABOUT DISTRIBUTION OF ESTATE

On March 16, 2021, at the headquarter of the High People’s Court of Ho Chi Minh City, the appellate trial of the case No. 491/2020/TLPT-DS entertained on October 14, 2020, regarding “Probate dispute about distribution of the estate” is open to the public.

Owing to the fact that the preliminary ruling No. 1043/2020/DS-ST dated July 21, 2020 of the People’s Court of Ho Chi Minh city is appealed. 

According to the Decision to bring the case to the appellate trial No. 320/2021/QD-PT dated February 24, 2021 between litigants:

1. Plaintiff: Mrs. Truong Kim A, born in 1951, residing at: No. 549/57/25, Le Van T street, ward X, district G, Ho Chi Minh city, is present.

- Person protecting the plaintiff’s legitimate rights and interests: Lawyer Nguyen Van T – Single-member Law Limited Liability Company Nguyen T and Partners, is present.

2. Defendant: Mrs. Ha Thi M, born in 1938.

Address: No. 75/1, street N, ward Y, district Z, Ho Chi Minh city, is present.

3. Persons with associated rights and obligations:

3.1. Mrs. Truong Anh N (Change, Ying- E) born in 1967, residing in China, is absent.

3.2. Mr. Truong The H, born in 1958, residing at No. 75/1, street N, ward Y, district Z, Ho Chi Minh city, is absent.

Authorized representative of Mrs. Nga and Mr. Hung: Mrs. Ha Thi M, born in 1938. Address: No. 75/1, street N, ward Y, district Z, Ho Chi Minh city, is present.

3.3. Mr. Truong Phu C, born in 1964, is absent; 3.4. Mrs. Truong Kim P, born in 1961, is absent. Are all residing overseas with unknown addresses.

3.5. People’s Committee of District Z, Ho Chi Minh city, is absent.

4. Appellant: Mrs. Ha Thi M appeals as a plaintiff.

CASE DETAILS

-According to the petition to sue dated September 28, 2017 and testimonies, the plaintiff Mrs. Truong Kim A made the following statement:

Her father, Mr. Truong Van S (born in 1913, died in 1985), and her mother, Mrs. Huynh Thi H (died in 1951), has a daughter, Truong Kim A. In 1958, Mr. S married Mrs. Ha Thi M. Then, Mr. S and Mrs. M had 04 children together, including Truong The H, Truong Kim P, Truong Phu C and Truong Anh N.

The house and land lot at the address: No. 75/1, N Street, Y ward, Z district, Ho Chi Minh City, were gifted to Mr. S before 1951. After Mrs. Hoa died, Mrs. A and Mrs. S lived in the house located at No. 75/1, Nguyen Tat Thanh. Till 1958, Mr. S married Mrs. M and took her to live with him in the same house. In 1971, Mrs. A got married and moved to live with her husband at the house located in district G.

In 1985, Mr. S died and Mrs. M kept having custody of the house. In 1988, Mrs. M applied for legalization of the house and land lot. In 2011, Mrs. M and 4 children born to her were granted the certificate of the right to use the land, own the house and other land-attached property by the People's Committee (abbreviated as PC) of district Z according to the certificate with the register No.: CH 00635 dated December 27, 2011. At the time of Mrs. M's application for registration of land and house and receipt of the certificate of the right over the land and house, Mrs. A was not informed of this.  During use of the house, Mrs. M repaired and reconstructed the house.

Mrs. A filed a petition to sue to request the Court to determine that the land and house located at No. 75/1, Street N, Ward Y, District Z, Ho Chi Minh City is the estate left by Mr. Truong Van S; request the Court to void the certificate of the right to use the land, own the house and land-attached property, No. CH 00635 dated December 27, 2011 of the People's Committee of District Z issued to Mrs. Ha Thi M to prove that she can jointly use the land and co-own the property with 04 heirs such as Truong The H, Truong Phu C, Truong Kim P and Truong Anh N. In case Mrs. M and 04 co-heirs want to keep the house and land, they must pay her 1/6 of the land value determined according to the valuation results.

- The defendant, Mrs. Ha Thi M, is making the following statement: Mrs. M and Mr. Truong Van S got married in 1958. After that, she lived with Mr. S at S’s house located at 75/1 N Street, Y Ward, Z District, Ho Chi Minh city. At that time, as a child about 6 years of age, Mrs. Truong Kim A lived with the couple.  About the year 1970, Mrs. A accompanied her husband to settle in another place.  Mrs. M and Mr. S gave birth to four children, including Truong The H, Truong Phu C, Truong Kim P and Truong Anh N. In 1985, Mr. S died intestate. Currently, Truong Phu C and Truong Kim P are living abroad (in the United States). As she does not know their address, she cannot provide it for the Court. Meanwhile, Nga is living in China.

For the house and land located at No. 75/1, Street N, Ward Y, District Z, Ho Chi Minh City, the People's Committee of District Z, Ho Chi Minh City has granted the Certificate of the right to use the land, own the house and other land-attached property dated December 27, 2011 to her and four children born to her and Mr. S. The original of this certificate is in her custody. After moving to live at No. 75/1 Street N, Ward Y, District Z, Ho Chi Minh City to date, Mrs. M has repaired her house three times in 1990, 2001, and 2014; the status quo of the house has no longer been preserved.

Now, Mrs. M does not agree with Mrs. A's request based on the argument that, because the house and land located at 75/1 N Street, Ward Y, District Z, Ho Chi Minh City has been in her custody for more than 30 years, the People's Committee of District Z's grant of the Certificate of the right to use the land, own the house and other land-attached property to her on December 27, 2011 is legal; The imitation period for distribution of Truong Van S's estate has expired.

- As the representative for persons with associated rights and obligations, Mr. Truong The H and Mrs. Truong Anh N, Mrs. Ha Thi M is making the following statement:  They all share the same opinion with the defendant that they disagree about with the petition to sue filed by the plaintiff, Mrs. A.

- According to the written statement No. 4134/UBND-NC dated December 6, 2017 of the People’s Committee of District Z, Ho Chi Minh city, The real property located at No. 75/1 N Street, Y Ward, District Z was originally created through carrying out earthworks or ground leveling for the purposes of residential house construction by the married couple, Mr. Truong Van S and Mrs. Ha Thi M, in. 1957. In 1985, Mr. S died. On November 17, 1988, the Construction Subdepartment of District Z submitted the Report No. 283/ND to the People's Committee of District Z on legalizing the house No. 75/1 N Street, Ward Y, District Z. On November 23, 1988, the People's Committee of District Z granted the permit for sale and transfer of the house No. 1012/GP to Mrs. Ha Thi M and Mr. Truong Van S who were the owners of the house No. 75/1 N Street, Y Ward, District Z.

On January 19, 1989, Mr. S's heirs applied and paid registration fees for transfer of the property after examination conducted on January 19, 1989, and registered those who were entitled to inherit Mr. S's estate located at No. 75/1 N Street, Y Ward, District Z, including: Mrs. Ha Thi M, Mr. Truong The H, Mr. Truong Phu C, Mrs. Truong Kim P and Mrs. Truong Anh N. On October 24, 2011, Mrs. Ha Thi M, as a representative for registration and declaration, together with co-heirs stood to apply for a certificate of the right to use the land, own the house and other land-attached property over the house and land located at No. 75/1 N Street, Y Ward, District Z. On November 23, 2011, the People's Committee of Ward Y, District Z attested that the house and land mentioned herein are not in dispute. On December 13, 2011, the Subdepartment of Natural Resources and Environment of District Z issued the Statement No. 3515/TTr-TNMT requesting the People's Committee of District Z to issue Mrs. Ha Thi M and Mr. Truong The H with a Certificate to enable them and other heirs to jointly use the land and own the property at the address No. 75/1 Street N, Ward Y, District Z.

Therefore, on December 27, 2011, the People's Committee of District Z issued the Certificate No. CHO0635 to Mrs. Ha Thi M and Mr. Truong The H who jointly use the land and own the property with other heirs while their decision under which, as overseas Vietnamese, Mr. Truong Phuc C, Mrs. Truong Kim P and Mrs. Truong Anh N enjoy the value of the house and land was made under their jurisdiction, and in conformity with the processes and procedures prescribed in the Land Law in Viet Nam and other instructional documents.  District Z’s PC is requesting the Court to try the case in accordance with law.

According to the preliminary ruling No. 1043/2020/DS-ST dated July 21, 2020, the People’s Court of Ho Chi Minh city made the following decision: 

Pursuant to Article 26, 35 and 37 in the Civil Procedures Code in Viet Nam;

Pursuant to Article 650, 651, 660, 688 of the Civil Code in Viet Nam; the Judicial Precedent No. Resolution No. 326/2016/UBTVQH14 in Viet Nam dated December 30, 2016, providing for court fees and charges; Pursuant to the 2008 Law on Civil Judgment Execution in Viet Nam;

Making the following pronouncements:

Accepting the plaintiff's petition to sue regarding:

Voiding 02 certificates of the rights to use the land, own the house and land-attached property having the registered number CH 00635 issued by the People's Committee of District Z, Ho Chi Minh City on November 27, 2011 to Mrs. Ha Thi M and Mr. Truong The H.

Determining that the land covering an area of ​​​​52.1m², worth VND 4,168,000,000 and located at 75/1 Nguyen Tat Thanh Ward Y, District Z, Ho Chi Minh City was the legacy left by Mr. Truong Van S.

Determining that legal heirs of Mr. Truong Van S include: Mrs. Ha Thi M, Mrs. Truong Kim A, Mr. Truong The H, Mr. Truong Phu Cuong, Mrs. Truong Kim P and Mrs. Truong Anh N.

Each of the heirs like Mrs. Truong Kim A, Mr. Truong The H, Mr. Truong Phu Cuong, Mrs. Truong Kim P and Mrs. Truong Anh N enjoys 1/7 of the estate value while Mrs. Ha Thi M enjoys 2/7 of the estate value.

Mr. Truong Phu C and Mrs. Truong Kim P are currently abroad, so Mrs. Ha Thi M is temporarily assigned to manage the part of the estate value of Mr. Cuong that Mrs. Phuong is entitled to. Whenever Mr. Cuong and Mrs. Phuong make their request, Mrs. M have to return the property.

Mrs. Ha Thi M, Mr. Truong The H, Mr. Truong Phu C, Mrs. Truong Kim P and Mrs. Truong Anh N are jointly responsible for paying Mrs. Truong Kim A an amount equivalent to 1/7 of the value of the right to use the land located at No. 75/1 Nguyen Tat Thanh Ward Y, District Z, Ho Chi Minh City at the price quoted at the time of judgment execution. Delivering and receiving money immediately after the judgment takes legal effect at the competent civil judgment enforcement authority.

In addition, the preliminary ruling has made a pronouncement regarding the first-instance civil court costs and valuation costs; regarding contact with the competent authority to apply for a certificate of the right to use the land, own the house and other land-attached property according to the provisions of law with respect to the house No. 75/1 Street N, Ward Y, District Z, Ho Chi Minh City.

- On July 21, 2020, the defendant, Mrs. Ha Thi M, appealed the entire preliminary ruling to the appellate court:

- The defendant, Mrs. Ha Thi M, upheld her appeal to request the Court of Appeal to dismiss the plaintiff's petition to sue regarding the distribution of Mr. S's estate of 51.2m² of the land located at 75/1 Street N., Ward Y, District Z, Ho Chi Minh City because the statute of limitations for requesting the distribution of the estate has expired. Besides, because, as a daughter, Mrs. A failed to fulfill the responsibility for taking care of the parents, she does not deserve inheriting the property.

- The plaintiff, Mrs. A, requests the preliminary ruling to be upheld and Mrs. M's appeal to be dismissed.

The lawyer protecting the legitimate interests of the plaintiff requests that the defendant's appeal should be dismissed and the preliminary ruling should be upheld.

The representative of the Procuracy has comments on the observance of the law: The trial panel of the Court of appeal and participants in legal proceedings has strictly complied with the provisions of the civil procedures law; the defendant's appeal is legitimate and eligible for being reviewed under the appellate legal proceedings. Because they also state that contents of the defendant’s appeal are ungrounded, they are requesting the Court to dismiss the appeal and uphold the preliminary ruling.

COURT’S JUDGEMENTS

Pursuant to documents and evidences examined at the court hearing, the results of the argument at the court hearing; the Trial Panel hereby states that:

[1] Ha Thi M's appeal is made in the correct form, filed within the statutory time limit, and is eligible for being settled according to the appellate procedures.

Because persons with related interests and obligations were duly subpoenaed twice and were still absent, they shall stand the trial in absentia as prescribed in Clause 3, Article 296 of the Civil Procedures Code.

[2] The defendant, Mrs. M, admitted that, before she and Mr. S got married, Mr. S had a stepchild named Truong Kim A. The house and land located at 75/1 N Street, Y ward, Z district, Ho Chi Minh city was created by Mr. S before 1958 when Mr. S married her. When Mrs. M lived with Mr. S, Mrs. A was also living in the same house with Mr. S. In 1970, Mrs. A married a husband, so she went to live with her husband. Mr. S was in the custody of the real estate at No. 75/1 N Street, Ward Y, District Z that had not yet obtained the certificate of ownership of the residential house and land. Till July 19, 1985, Mr. S died intestate.

Mrs. M continued to be in the custody of the real estate at No. 75/1 that Mr. S bequeathed till 1988 and then she applied for the certificate of ownership of the residential house and land.

In the application form for property transfer dated January 19, 1989 (BL No. 123), Mrs. M declared that the house No. 75/1 Street N was the estate that Mr. S bequeathed to the heirs, including his wife, Mrs. Ha Thi M, and his children, Truong The H, Truong Kim P, Truong Phu C and Truong Anh N.

Considering that the application for the certificate of the right to use the land and own the house and other land-attached property dated October 24, 2011 (BL No. 120 -121), enclosing the list of co-users of the land plot and co-owners of the house and other land-attached property in which Mrs. M included her name and names of her children born to Mr. S, such as Truong The H, Truong Kim P, Truong Phu C and Truong Anh N, and from which she left out Mrs. Truong Kim A, Mr. S's stepchild. And Mrs. A also had no written refusal to accept the legacy of Mr. S. Considering that Mrs. M's incomplete declaration of Mr. S's heirs, the People's Committee of District Z’s grant of a Certificate of the right to use the land, own the house and other land-attached property bearing the registered number CH 00635 to Mrs. Ha Thi M and a Certificate of the right to use the land, own the house and other land-attached property bearing the registered number CH 00635 to Mr. Truong The H as the co-use of the land and other attached property together with Mrs. Truong Kim P, Mr. Truong Phu C and Mrs. Truong Anh N, failed to meet the regulatory requirements concerning assurance of legitimate interests of Mrs. Kim Anh. The preliminary ruling giving the pronouncement that two Certificates No. CH 00635 granted to Mr. M and Mr. Hung proving the right over the land located at No. 05, map sheet No. 04, covering an area of 52.1m² at No. 75/1 N street, Y ward, Z district, Ho Chi Minh city is grounded.

[3] According to her appeal, Mrs. M states that, as she has been in custody of the legacy left by Mr. S for more than 30 years, such property is no longer an estate. However, the Official Dispatch No. 01/GD-TANDTC in Viet Nam dated January 5, 2018 of the Supreme People's Court provides the following instructions: "From the effective date of the 2015 Civil Code, according to the provisions of Point d, Clause 1, Article 688 of the 2015 Civil Code, Clause 4, Article 4 of the Resolution No. 02/2016/NQ-HDTP in Viet Nam dated June 30, 2016 of the Panel of Judges of the Supreme People's Court, guiding the implementation of a number of provisions of the Resolution No. 103/2015/QH13 in Viet Nam dated November 25, 2015 of the National Assembly on the implementation of the Civil Procedures Code and the Resolution No. 104/2015/QH13 in Viet Nam dated November 25, 2015 of the National Assembly on the implementation of the Law on Administrative Procedures in Viet Nam, from January 1, 2017, the Court shall apply Clause 1, Article 623 of the Civil Code 2015 on the statute of limitations to accept and settle the civil case "Probate dispute”. According to this regulation, the statute of limitations for the heir’s request for the distribution of the estate is 30 years in case of inheritance of real property from the time of initiation of the establishment of the inheritance relationship.

For the case of inheritance relationship established before September 10, 1990, the statute of limitations for initiating a lawsuit to divide the inherited estate as the real property shall be subject to the provisions of Article 36 of the 1990 Ordinance on Inheritance in Viet Nam and the instructions given in the Resolution No. 02/HDTP in Viet Nam dated October 19, 1990 of the Panel of Judges of the Supreme People's Court, guiding the implementation of a number of provisions of the Ordinance on Inheritance, namely the statute of limitations for initiating a lawsuit which is counted from September 10, 1990".

Because Mr. Truong Van S died before September 10, 1990, the statute of limitations for initiation of a lawsuit to request the distribution of Mr. S's estate started on September 10, 1990.  This means that Mrs. Truong Kim A’s initiation of a lawsuit to request the distribution of Mr. S’s estate on September 28, 2017 is within the statute for limitations for initiation of the lawsuit.  Therefore, there is no grounds for acceptance of Mrs. M's appeal in which she supposes that the request for inheritance is made by the child taking care of the father after expiry of the statute of limitations and the child has no right to inherit the estate.

 [4] According to the diagram of the residential house and land located at No. 75/1 N street, ward Y, district Z (No. 73), the residential land covering an area of ​​52.1m² in the land plot No. 05, map sheet No. 04 ; purposes of use: private urban land. According to the Official Dispatch No. 1312/UBND-DT dated May 4, 2018 of the People's Committee of District Z, Ho Chi Minh city, the house and land No. 75/1 Street N, Ward Y, District Z, Ho Chi Minh city in the area outside the boundary of Nha Rong - Khanh Hoi port project.

The plaintiff, Mrs. A, admitted that all property attached to the land belonged to Mrs. M, built and repaired by Mrs. M after Mr. S's death, and the status quo of the old house no longer exists. Therefore, Mr. S's legacy determined to be the land area of ​​52.1m² belonging to the land plot number 05, map sheet 04 at the address 75/1 N Street, Y ward, Z district, Ho Chi Minh city is distributed by operation of law, and the beneficiaries of Mr. S's legacy are the first-line successors, including Mrs. Ha Thi M and Mr. S's children, including Truong Kim A, Truong The H, Truong Phu C, Truong Kim P and Truong Anh N according to the provisions of Articles 650 and 651 of the 2015 Civil Code.

Mrs. M disagrees over distribution of the estate upon the plaintiff’s request. Considering that According to the Legal Precedent No. 05/2016/AL regarding “Probate dispute”, “In the case involving inheritance dispute, there is an involved party who is entitled to inherit a part of the estate and has made efforts to contribute to the management and embellishment of the legacy but does not agree to the division of the estate (because they think that the statute of limitations for initiating a lawsuit on inheritance has expired), impose no specific requirement to consider their contributions to the management and embellishment of the inheritance; If the Court decides on the distribution of the estate among the heirs, they must consider their contribution because the request for non-distribution of the inheritance for the inheritance is larger than the request for consideration of the efforts”. Because Mrs. M made efforts during the process of management, preservation and custody of the estate, the trial court’s application of the Legal Precedent No. 05/2016/AL to divide Mrs. S's estate into 7 parts and distributed 02 shares of the estate to Mrs. M (01 share granted in consideration of inheritance and 01 share granted in consideration of Mrs. M's contribution) and divide it among Mr. S's children, including Truong Kim A, Truong The H, Truong Phu C, Truong Kim P, Truong Anh N, each of whom received a share of inheritance, is grounded. Therefore, there is no sound and sufficient grounds for accepting Mrs. M's appeal.

Considering that, as the opinion of the lawyer protecting the legitimate rights and interests of the plaintiff and the opinion of the representative of the High People's Procuracy in Ho Chi Minh City are grounded and consistent with the above statement, it is acceptable.

[5] As for the shares of the estate that Mr. Truong Phu C and Truong Kim P are bequeathed, as litigants like Mr. Cuong, Mrs. Phuong (unknown address) and Mrs. Nga is living abroad, they are handled as follows:  According to the Legal Precedent No. 06/2016/AL: “In the case of the probate dispute involving an heir residing in a foreign country, if the Court has conducted the judicial entrustment, collected evidences in accordance with the provisions of law, but cannot determine that heir’s unknown address, the Court shall still handle the plaintiff's claim; if the inheritance, the class of inheritance and the person who left the estate without will are identified, the inheritance shall be divided to the plaintiff in accordance with law; The share of the inheritance of the absentee, whose address cannot be determined, should be temporarily transferred to the people living in the country for their custody for later handover to the absent heirs”. Therefore, by applying the Legal Precedent No. 06/2016/AL of the Judicial Council of the Supreme People's Court, the preliminary ruling’s statement that Mrs. Ha Thi M was assigned in custody of the inheritance of the shares of the estate of Mr. Cuong, Mrs. Phuong and Mrs. Nga, and then Mrs. M would assign them to Mr. Cuong, Mrs. Phuong, and Mrs. Nga, is grounded. Considering that, because the estate is a small land that cannot be inherited in kind, the plaintiff, Mrs. A, wishes to receive the value of the estate in cash. At the appellate court hearing, Mrs. M stated that she and Mr. Hung are currently managing and using the same estate of 52.1m² at No. 75/1 N Street, Y Ward, District Z, Ho Chi Minh city. However, the preliminary ruling stating that Mr. Truong Phu Cuong, Mrs. Truong Kim P and Mrs. Truong Anh N must be jointly responsible for paying Mrs. A an amount equivalent to 1/7 of the value of the right to use the land located at No. 75/1 Nguyen Tat Thanh, Ward Y, District Z, Ho Chi Minh city, is improper. It should be corrected as follows: Forcing Mrs. M and Mr. Hung to be jointly responsible for paying Mrs. Truong Kim A an amount corresponding to 1/7 of the estate, which is the value of the right to use the land of ​​​​52.1m² at 75/1 N Street, Y Ward, District Z, Ho Chi Minh city at the price at the time of judgment execution, is lawful.

 [6] Regarding the appellate civil court costs: because Mrs. M's appeal is not accepted, she must bear the appellate civil court costs according to the law. Nonetheless, after considering that Mrs. M is an elderly person, she is exempt from paying appellate civil court costs according to the provisions of Point dd, Clause 1, Article 12 of the Resolution No. 326/2016/UBTVQH14 dated December 30, 2016 of the National Assembly’s Standing Committee, prescribing the rates, exemption, reduction, collection, payment, management and use of court fees and charges;

[7] After completion of execution of the judgement, if other decisions of the preliminary ruling regarding the judgment execution obligation; application for the certificate of the right to use the land, own the house and other land-attached property in accordance with the law with respect to the house No. 75/1 N Street, Y Ward, District Z , Ho Chi Minh city are not subject to any appeal or protest, they will take effect from the date of expiration of the time limit for filing of the appeal or protest.

In light of the aforesaid statements;

HEREBY DECIDES

1. Pursuant to clause 2 of Article 308 in the 2015 Civil Procedure Code; point dd of clause 1 of Article 12 in the Resolution No. 326/2016/UBTVQH14 dated December 30, 2016 of the Standing Committee of the National Assembly, stipulating rates, exemption, reduction, collection, payment, management and use of court fees and charges;

Do not accept the appeal of the defendant, Mrs. Ha Thi M. Partially correcting the preliminary civil ruling No. 1043/2020/DS-ST dated July 21, 2020 of the People's Court of Ho Chi Minh city:

Applying Article 26, 35 and 37 in the Civil Procedure Code; Article 650, 651, 660, 688 of the 2015 Civil Code; the Judicial Precedent No. 05/2016/AL and No. 06/2016/AL that were passed by the Panel of Judges of the Supreme People's Court on April 6, 2016.  Making the following pronouncements:

1. Accepting the petition to sue filed by the plaintiff, Truong Kim A.

1.1. Voiding 02 certificates of the rights to use the land, own the house and land-attached property having the registered number CH 00635 issued by the People's Committee of District Z, Ho Chi Minh City on November 27, 2011 to Mrs. Ha Thi M and Mr. Truong The H with respect to the land plot No. 05, map sheet No. 04, covering an area of 52.1m² at No. 75/1, Nguyen Tat Thanh, Ward Y, District Z, Ho Chi Minh city.

1.2. Determining that the share of land covering an area of ​​​​52.1m², located at No. 75/1 Nguyen Tat Thanh, Ward Y, District Z, Ho Chi Minh city is the legacy left by Mr. Truong Van S.

1.3. Determining that the legal heirs of Mr. Truong Van S include: Mrs. Ha Thi M, Mrs. Truong Kim A, Mr. Truong The H, Mr. Truong Phu Cuong, Mrs. Truong Kim P and Mrs. Truong Anh N.

1.4. Each of the heirs like Mrs. Truong Kim A, Mr. Truong The H, Mr. Truong Phu C, Mrs. Truong Kim P and Mrs. Truong Anh N is bequeathed 1/7 of the estate value while Mrs. Ha Thi M is bequeathed 2/7 of the estate value.

1.5. Forcing Mrs. Ha Thi M and Mr. Truong The H who are jointly using the estate of 52.1m² to pay Mrs. Truong Kim A an amount corresponding to 1/7 of the value of the right to use the land of ​​​​52.1m² at 75/1 N Street, Y Ward, District Z, Ho Chi Minh city at the price determined at the time of judgment enforcement.

2. Temporarily assigning Mrs. Ha Thi M, Mr. Truong The H to manage the inheritance value that Mr. Truong Phu Cuong, Mrs. Truong Kim P and Mrs. Truong Anh N are bequeathed so that Mrs. M and Mr. Hung will be responsible for handing over the estate to Mr. Cuong, Mrs. Phuong and Mrs. Nga in the future.

3. Regarding the appellate civil court costs: Mrs. Ha Thi M is exempted from paying the appellate civil court costs.

4. After completion of execution of the judgement, if other decisions of the preliminary ruling regarding the judgment execution obligation; first-instance trial costs; application for the certificate of the right to use the land, own the house and other land-attached property in accordance with the law with respect to the house No. 75/1 N Street, Y Ward, District Z , Ho Chi Minh city are not subject to any appeal or protest, they will take effect from the date of expiration of the time limit for filing of the appeal or protest.

5. In cases where the court judgement is executed under the provisions of Article 2 of the 2014 amended Law on Civil Judgment Execution in Viet Nam, the obligee and obligor to execution of the civil judgment may negotiate about how the judgment is executed, the right to request judgment execution, voluntary execution of the court judgement or shall be subject to law enforcement processes under Articles 6, 7, 7a, 7b and 9 of the 2014 amended Law on Civil Judgment Execution; the time limit for execution of the court judgement is subject to regulations laid down in Article 30 of the 2014 amended Law on Civil Judgement Execution.

6. The Appellate Judgement shall enter into force from the pronouncement date.