Judgment No. 31/2017/HNGD-PT dated february 16, 2017 on dispute over housing ownership and land use right

SUPERIOR PEOPLE’S COURT IN HANOI

JUDGMENT NO. 31/2017/HNGD-PT DATED FEBRUARY 16, 2017 ON DISPUTE OVER HOUSING OWNERSHIP AND LAND USE RIGHT  

On February 16, 2017, at the head office of the Superior People’s Court in Hanoi, an appellate court hearing is conducted to hear the case No. 09/2016/TLPT-HNGD dated June 9, 2016 on dispute over housing ownership and land use right according to the appeal of the respondent and persons with relevant rights and obligations and protest of Chief Procurator of the People’s Procuracy of Nam Dinh province against the First Instance Marriage and Family Judgment No. 06/2016/HNGD-ST dated March 23, 2016 of the People’s Court of Nam Dinh province.

Based on the Decision to Bring the Case to Trial No. 217/2017/QD-PT dated January 24, 2017 between litigants:

1. Petitioner:  Mrs. Nguyen Thi Kim Mai, born in 1966.

Address: 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan, Tran Te Xuong ward, Nam Dinh city, Nam Dinh province; present.

2. Respondent:  Mr. Vu The Tuan, born in 1962

Address: 39 Tong Van Tran, Tran Hung Dao ward, Nam Dinh city, Nam Dinh province; present.

* Persons with related interests and obligations:

the People’s Committee of Nam Dinh city;

- Legal representative: Mr. Le Quoc Chinh - the President of the People’s Committee of Nam Dinh city; absent (Dispatch No. 66/UBND-NC dated February 9, 2017 - request for trial in absentia).

- Mr. Dang Quoc Hoang, born in 1990; present.

- Mrs. Truong Thi Yen, born in 1989; absent.

Co-address: 63/2 Cu Chi Lan, Tran Te Xuong ward, Nam Dinh city

- Mrs. Vu Hong Nhung, born in 1988; address: 39 Tong Van Tran, Tran Hung Dao ward, Nam Dinh city, Nam Dinh province; absent with Letter of Authorization dated February 2, 2017 to Mr. Vu The Tuan.

FINDING THAT

* Representation of the lawsuit petition and depositions made in the case file of the petitioner, Mrs. Nguyen Thi Kim Mai:

She and Mr. Vu The Tuan got married in 1997 at Vietnamese Embassy in Ukraine. Early in their marriage, they had lived happily together. But in later 2010, they came into conflicts as Mr. Tuan had love affairs and they lost their feeling to each other. In early 2011, they have lived separately and now no one takes care of each other, so she requests the court to obtain a divorce from Mr. Tuan.

When following legal proceedings at the court, she knows that the marriage certificate between them was illegally granted. Since their marital bond actually broke, Mr. Tuan tricked her and he had a wife before getting married to her. She did not know that the marriage certificate given by Mr. Tuan was illegally granted. She requests the court to resolve their case as per the law.

With reference to common children: She and Mr. Tuan have one common child named Vu Mai Chi, born on May 15, 2004. Now, she has lived with Mr. Tuan. While doing business, she and Mr. Tuan mutually agree to give her USD 5,000 as a dowry.  Once being granted divorce, she seeks custody of Vu Mai Chi, but as Chi has grown up, she will decide whom she will live together with.

With reference to property: She and Mr. Tuan have no debt. During their marriage, she and Mr. Tuan bought two houses; one house is at 42/2 Goc Mit, Vi Xuyen ward, Nam Dinh province and one house is at No. 5B, Le Chua Ca street. The house at 42/2 Goc Mit was bought using her own money transferred to Mr. Tuan, the house at No. 5B, Le Chua Ca street was bought using her own money from her private house at No. 21 Ben Primary school, Ngo Quyen ward, Nam Dinh province and are intended for her two stepchildren. In March 2008, she sold the house at No. 5B Le Chua Ca street for VND 150,000,000 and in April 2008, she bought the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chi Lan. Her stepson, Mr. Dang Quoc Hoang, has lived in this house since then. Being a woman and holding belief in Mr. Tuan, she let Mr. Tuan have his name co-included in the documents on house purchase and money transfer.  All house purchase documents are kept by Mr. Tuan in Vietnam because she lives in Ukraine. Due to some contention in points of view, in September 2010, she and Mr. Tuan agreed that Mr. Tuan would live in the house at No. 42/2 Goc Mit and she would live in the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chi Lan. In 2010, she and Mr. Tuan agreed that each person would use a house, so she gives no further request. The house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan is owned by her and her son, valued at VND 300,000,000, and she does not request the court to value it. She requests the court to consider protecting her and her son’s interests.

* Representation of Mr. Vu The Tuan:

In later 1997, in Ukraine, he and Mrs. Mai had cohabited with each other. During the cohabitation, he and Mrs. Mai had a baby unexpectedly, so he had a third party forge a marriage certificate to legalize the birth and apply for a birth certificate. His first exit is in November 1997, Mrs. Mai’s first exist is in 2000, the fake marriage certificate is in February 19997. So, the marriage certificate between them is fake and illegal. He cohabited with Mrs. Hoang Thi Hanh from later 1996 to middle 1997 and then registered marriage at the People’s Committee of Tran Hung Dao ward. In January 1, 1997 he went to Ukraine. 3 years later after he left, Mrs. Hanh returned to her countryside in Tien Hai, Thai Binh to get married, but he and Mrs. Hanh have not got divorced, so in terms of legal aspect, he and Mrs. Hanh are still husband and wife. He requests the court to recognize that he and Mrs. Mai are not legal husband and wife.

With reference to common children: He and Mrs. Mai have one common child named Vu Mai Chi, born on May 15, 2004. Since Chi has lived together with him since she was young, he claims custody of Chi and requests Mrs. Mai to provide monthly child maintenance of VND 2,000,000 and give it one year in advance.

With reference to property: In early 2005, he and Mrs. Mai brought the common child to the paternal grandparents for care, in that time, they came into conflicts, so they mutually agreed to divide property gained during their joint business. The property includes the house at No. 42/2 Goc Mit and the house at No. 5B Le Chua Ca street. He and Mrs. Mai completely divided the houses before going abroad, since then, they have done private business but still lived together for costs saving. In 2008, he spent his own money on buying the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chi Lan, Tran Te Xuong ward, Nam Dinh city from Mrs. Hoi. He let the stepson of Mrs. Mai to live there as a free-rent shelter to look after the house. Since the house was in the name of Mrs. Hoi’s husband, Mr. Nguyen Huu Con (died), to be transferred the title of the house, he must follow the procedure for posting up notice at the ward and notifying the neighborhood more than 30 days to conclude the contract. At that time, Mrs. Mai was still in Vietnam and her son still lived in this house. Knowing that this house is owned by Mr. Tuan, they give no opinion. The house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan is his private property, in 2010, when the title of this house was transferred to him, he gifted it to his stepdaughter, Mrs. Vu Hong Nhung. Now, the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan is in the name of his daughter, valued at VND 300,000,000; and he does not request the court to value it. Request the court to consider resolving the case.

Representation of persons with relevant rights and obligations:

Mr. Dang Quoc Hoang: Earlier, his family lived at the house No. 21 Ben Thoc, Ngo Quyen ward, Nam Dinh. After his father passed away, her mother (Mrs. Mai) sold this house to get money to do business abroad. In 2005, her mother bought the house at No. 5B Le Chua Ca street for him to live. In March 2008, her mother sold the house at No. 5B Le Chua Ca street and bought the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan for him and his siblings as a place to live and worship his father. In 2010, he got married and has lived in the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan since then. The house purchase was totally made by his mother.

Mrs. Truong Thi Yen: In 2010, she got married to Mr. Hoang and has lived in the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan without lease from anyone. From living in boarding house to getting married to Mr. Hoang, she did not see Mr. Tuan or Mrs. Nhung visiting their house.

Mrs. Vu Hong Nhung: She is the natural daughter of Mr. Vu The Tuan. The house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan is in her name, the address of the certificate is 20/73 Cu Chi Lan, Tran Te Xuong ward. This house was previously owned by Mr. Hoi and Mr. Con. Mrs. Hoi sold this house to his father legally and his father gifted it to her as a dowry. She was legally transferred the title of the house, which is valued at VND 300,000,000. She requests the court to compel Mrs. Mai and Mr. Hoang to revert the house to her. She will finance Mr. Hoang VND 2,000,000 for transport cost and VND 15,000,000 for house lease cost in a year.

Mrs. Hoang Thi Hanh: She got married to Mr. Vu The Tuan in 1997 at the People’s Committee of Tran Hung Dao ward, Nam Dinh. She and Mr. Tuan have not got divorced but they have no common children and common property, so she requests the court not to bring her to the legal proceedings and she gives no opinion.

In the First Instance Judgment No. 03/2014/HNGD-ST dated January 17, 2014, the People’s Committee of Nam Dinh province applied Clause 1 Article 11, Articles 14, 56, 92, 95 of the Law on Marriage and Family; Articles 122, 127, 128 of the Civil Code; Article 202 of the Civil Procedure Code; Resolution No. 02/2000/NQ-HDTP dated December 23, 2000 of Council of Justices of the Supreme People’s Court; the Ordinance of Court Fees and Charges; Resolution No. 01/2012/NQ-HDTP dated June 13, 2012 of Council of Justices of the Supreme People’s Court to judge:

1. With reference to conjugal relationship: Do not recognize Mr. Vu The Tuan and Mrs. Nguyen Thi Kim Mai as legal husband and wife.  Terminate the cohabitation between Mr. Tuan and Mrs. Mai.

2. With reference to common children: Recognize the arrangement of Mr. Vu The Tuan and Mrs. Nguyen Thi Kim Mai. Award the custody of Vu Mai Chi, born on May 15, 2004 to Mr. Vu The Tuan. Mrs. Mai is obliged to provide monthly child support of VND 1,000,000 until Chi attains the age of majority. Mr. Tuan shall keep managing USD 5,000 of Vu Mai Chi and return her until she attains the age of majority.

3. With reference to property: Declare the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan (now is 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan), Tran Te Xuong ward, Nam Dinh is under ownership and use of Mrs. Nguyen Thi Kim Mai.

Declare annulment of land use right certificate in the name of Mr. Vu The Tuan No. BE144387 dated March 30, 2011, of the land plot No. 138, of the map No. 15 at 20/73 Cu Chinh Lan, Tran Te Xuong ward, Nam Dinh.

Accept the voluntary consent of Mrs. Mai to give Mr. Tuan USD 2,000 as the remuneration for his contribution to buy the house.

Do not accept the reclaim of the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan, Tran Te Xuong ward, Nam Dinh of Mrs. Vu Hong Nhung.

Mrs. Mai is obliged to contact the competent authorities complete the paperwork of land use right certificate as per the law.

After first-instance trial, the respondent, Mr. Vu The Tuan, appealed the Judgment which annul the land use right certificate in his name; request clarify if he publicly posted up the house purchase contract between him and Bui Thi Hoi at the People’s Committee of Tran Te Xuong ward; request Mrs. Mai to provide the amount of child custody 1 year in advance.

In the Appellate Judgment No. 209/2014/HNGD-PT dated December 25, 2014, the Court of Appeal of the Supreme People’s Court in Hanoi annulled partial the First Instance Judgment No. 03/2014/HNGD-ST dated January 17, 2014 of the People’s Court of Nam Dinh province regarding property matter. Refer the case file to the People’s Court of Nam Dinh province for first instance re-trial.

Representation of the litigants during the second first instance re-trial:

Mrs. Nguyen Thi Kim Mai at first requests the court to consider the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan as common property and aggregate two houses and all their property for dividing into halves; and then state that the house in dispute is private property. Regarding USD 2,000 which Mr. Tuan is still owed to her, she now changes her mind not to wipe out it and requests Mr. Tuan to repay her for child support.

Mr. Vu The Tuan requests that if Mrs. Mai reverts the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan to him, he will let her stay there a free-rent shelter and he will finance her VND 50,000,000.

In the First Instance Civil Judgment No. 06/2016/HNGD-ST dated March 23, 2016, the People’s Court of Nam Dinh province applied Articles 122, 127, 128, 137, 305, 389, 468, 471, 474, 476 of the Civil Code; Article 32a of the Civil Procedure Code; Ordinance on Court Fees and Charges to judge:

1. Declare the house and land of land lot 138, map No. 15, area of 93.9m2, at No. 20/73 Cu Chinh Lan (now is 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan), Tran Te Xuong ward, Nam Dinh is under ownership and use of Mrs. Nguyen Thi Kim Mai.

Declare annulment of certificate of land use right and housing ownership and property on land in the name of Mr. Vu The Tuan No. BE144387 granted by the People’s Committee of Nam Dinh city dated March 30, 2011, land lot No. 138, map No. 15, at No. 20/73 Cu Chinh Lan (now is 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan), Tran Te Xuong ward, Nam Dinh. (Changed contents: Gift the house to Mrs. Vu Hong Nhung according to the certification of land registration bureau of Nam Dinh city dated June 29, 2011).

Declare annulment of the gift deed between Mr. Vu The Tuan and Mrs. Vu Hong Nhung dated June 15, 2011 as the house and land under the certificate of land use right, housing ownership and property on land No. BE144387 granted by the People’s Committee of Nam Dinh city dated March 30, 2011.

Do not accept the reclaim of the house at No. 20/73 Cu Chinh Lan, Tran Te Xuong ward, Nam Dinh of Mrs. Vu Hong Nhung against Mrs. Mai, Mr. Hoang, Mrs. Yen.

Mrs. Nguyen Thi Kim Mai has the right to contact with the competent authorities to declare and apply for certificate of land use right and housing ownership under this Judgment.

2. Compel Mr. Vu The Tuan to pay Mrs. Nguyen Thi Kim Mai USD 2,000 (equivalent to VND 44,740,000).

In addition, the Court of First Instance also decided on court fees and notifies the right to appeal in accordance with the law.

On March 24, 2016, Mr. Vu The Tuan and Mrs. Vu Hong Nhung appealed the entire First Instance Judgment, requesting the Court of Appeal to recognize the gift deed between Mr. Tuan and Vu Hong Nhung, recognize the legal land use right of Mrs. Nhung; USD 2,000 payable to Mrs. Mai is considered improper.

On April 4, 2016, Chief Procurator of the People’s Procuracy of Nam Dinh province issued the Decision No. 01/QDKNPT-DS protesting the Judgment No. 06/2016/HNGD-ST dated March 23, 2016 of the People’s Court of Nam Dinh province under appellate procedure stating that there are justifiable grounds for determining that the amount to buy the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan was spent by Mr. Tuan; there are invalid grounds for determining that the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan is under ownership right of Mrs. Mai; after the case was annulled, items of evidence are substantially unchanged, but the Court of First Instance determined that the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan is under ownership right of Mrs. Mai. This decision was improper.

At the appellate court hearing, the petitioner upholds the lawsuit request; the respondent and persons with relevant rights and obligations upholds their appeal; the representative of the Superior People’s Procuracy in Hanoi upholds the protest of the Chief Procurator of the People’s Procuracy of Nam Dinh province; the litigants cannot reach an arrangement to resolve the case regarding the appeal.

As for the case, the representative of Superior People’s Procuracy in Hanoi states that: documents in the case file and depositions of the litigants show many conflicts. The protest of Chief Procurator of the People’s Procuracy of Nam Dinh province is grounded, so request the Trial Panel to quash the First Instance Judgment for retrial.

Based on documents and items of evidence assessed at the court hearing; argument result at the court hearing and extensive verification of items of evidence, opinions of the litigants; procurators; after discussion and deliberation;

CONSIDERING THAT

1. In terms of court procedures:

The Court of First Instance re-accepted the case and determine it as a “dispute over housing ownership and land use right" as prescribed in Clause 7, Article 25; Article 32a of the Civil Procedure Code 2004, now is Clause 9, Article 26; Article 37 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015. This determination is compliant with law.

As the appeal petitions of the respondent and persons with relevant rights and obligations were made within the statutory time limit, they are eligible for being considered under appellate procedure. At the appellate court hearing, the litigants, present or requesting for trial in absentia; the petitioner upholds the lawsuit request; the respondent and persons with relevant rights and obligations upholds their appeal; the representative of the Superior People’s Procuracy in Hanoi upholds the protest of the Chief Procurator of the People’s Procuracy of Nam Dinh province; the litigants cannot reach an arrangement to resolve the case regarding the appeal, so the case is tried under appellate procedure.

2. In terms of the content:

Mrs. Nguyen Thi Kim Mai and Mr. Vu The Tuan had lived together from 1997, had common child and property. During the case resolution, the courts made decisions about conjugal relationship determining that Mr. Tuan and Mrs. Mai are not husband and wife; awarded child custody to Mr. Tuan and Mrs. Mai is obliged to provide child support for Mr. Tuan. These decisions became legally effective.

With reference to property: During their marriage time and joint business, in 2005, Mr. Tuan and Mrs. Mai mutually agreed in writing to divide their property into two parts, in specific: The house at No. 42/2 Goc Mit is privately owned by Mr. Vu The Tuan and the house at No. 5B Le Chua Ca street is privately owned by Mrs. Nguyen Thi Kim Mai.

As Mrs. Mai stated, the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan was bought in April 2008 through a deal between him, Mr. Tuan and Mrs. Hoi (house owner) and Mrs. Hoi’s children. The sum used to buy this house originated from the amount earned from sale of the house at No. 5B Le Chua Ca street. Being a woman and holding a belief in Mr. Tuan, she let Mr. Tuan to pay the first installment and keep house purchase documents. In 2010, she and Mr. Tuan mutually agreed to split the houses. Mr. Tuan would stay at the house at No. 42/2 Goc Mit and Mrs. Mai would stay at the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan (the agreement was written by Mr. Tuan on July 29, 2010).

Mr. Tuan claims that this house belongs to him because he spent his own money on buying it. On December 17, 2010, at the Public Notary Office No. 1 of Nam Dinh province, Mr. Vu The Tuan and Mrs. Bui Thi Hong signed the transfer contract for land use right and property on land associated with the house and land No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan. On March 30, 2011, Mr. Vu The Tuan was granted the land use right certificate No. BE 144387 by the People’s Committee of Nam Dinh province with the register No. 13-63601227. On June 15, 2011, Mr. Tuan made a deed to gift the house and land to his daughter Vu Hong Nhung.

The Court of First Instance determined the transfer contract made by Mr. Tuan and Mrs. Hoi on December 17, 2010 null and void according to the basis that the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan has been used by Mrs. Mai’s child since 2008 and the transfer contract with Mrs. Hoi dated April 21, 2008 was concluded by both Mr. Tuan and Mrs. Mai. This is an ungrounded determination because when Mr. Tuan applied to the land use right certificate, this land plot was not in dispute.  The Court of First Instance determined that the house and land at 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan is privately owned by Mrs. Mai and annulled the land use right certificate No. BE 144387 and register No. 13-63601227 in the name of Mr. Vu The Tuan. This decision was quashed by the Court of Appeal of the Supreme People’s Court in Hanoi for retrial because the case file has insufficient grounds for determining that whether the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan is privately owned by Mrs. Mai or Mr. Vu The Tuan.

During the first instance retrial, in the petition dated February 12, 2015, Mrs. Mai states “I and Mr. Vu The Tuan have lived together for 15 years and have had common houses at No. 42/2 Goc Mit and 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan, Nam Dinh city and one common child named Mai Chi” (case file p. 238); in the deposition dated January 6, 2015, she states “In 2008, I and Mr. Tuan sold my house at No. 5B Ngo Le and bought the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan for Hoang to live” and request “the Court and the People’s Procuracy of Nam Dinh province to include both houses and all property for dividing into halves” (case file p. 240, 241); in case file p.263, Mrs. Mai claims the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan as her private property; and at the reconciliation meeting between Mr. Tuan and her on March 10, 2015, she stated: “Now I request the court to consider the houses at 42/2 Goc Mit and 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan as the common property of me and Mr. Tuan…”. In this reconciliation meeting, Mr. Tuan also stated that considering Mrs. Mai’s financial hardship, in 2010, I agreed to give Mrs. Mai the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan. In appellate court hearing, Mrs. Mai still asserts that the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan is common property of her and Mr. Tuan and the house is only worth one third of the house at No. 42/2 Goc Mit but because of her and her son’s sickness, she accepts to receive this house at a disadvantage.

As for the money used to buy the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan, Mr. Tuan and Mrs. Mai have made inconsistent depositions. Mrs. Mai states that she sold the house at No. 5B Le Chua Ca street for VND 145,000,000 and used this sum to buy this house; Mr. Tuan at first stated that he spent his saving on buying this house and then restated that he used money given by his sister, Vu Hong Lien, who has worked in Taiwan. In today’s court hearing, Mr. Tuan restates that he did not borrow money from his sister, the court recorded wrong information; the value of the houses at 42/2 Goc Mit and 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan is equal, not different as declared by Mrs. Mai. Mr. Tuan asserts that the house in dispute is his private property and requests the Trial Panel to accept that truth. Mr. Tuan also claims that after selling the house at No. 5B Le Chua Ca street, Mrs. Mai used partial sum to buy a kiosk for business and used the remaining amount for her first son to go abroad, so she could not have enough money to buy the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan.

Considering all items of evidence in the case file and depositions of the litigants at the court hearing, there are valid grounds to determine that: The house and land at 63/2 Cu Chi Lan in dispute was previously owned by Mrs. Bui Thi Hoi and Mrs. Nguyen Thi Hong Nhung (Mrs. Hoi’s husband died). On April 21, 2008, Mr. Tuan and Mrs. Mai signed the transfer contract as the buyer with Mrs. Hoi and her daughter (this contract was made in handwritten copy by Mrs. Nhung, Mrs. Hoi's daughter - case file p. 28). On July 28, 2010, Mr. Tuan made a written arrangement to give Mrs. Mai this house. However, this document was neither signed by Mr. Tuan and Mrs. Mai nor duly certified as per the law. On December 17, 2010, at the Public Notary Office No. 1 of Nam Dinh province, Mr. Vu The Tuan and Mrs. Bui Thi Hong signed the transfer contract for land use right and property on land associated with the house and land No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan. On March 30, 2011, Mr. Vu The Tuan was granted the land use right certificate No. BE 144387 by the People’s Committee of Nam Dinh province with the register No. 13-63601227. Mr. Tuan willingly signed the house transfer contract with Mrs. Hoi while the handwritten purchase agreement with Mrs. Hoi and Mrs. Hoi’ daughter bears the signature of Mrs. Mai as the buyer (Mr. Tuan’s wife). This is a fraud. Although this document was notarized and certified, the Court of First Instance declared it null and void. This is a right decision.

Based on statements of the litigants, items of evidence provided by parties have many conflicts in determining who is the owner of the house in dispute; whether the house is privately or jointly owned, the money used to buy this house also involve inconsistency; Mrs. Mai sometimes declares that the house is the common property of her and Mr. Tuan; sometimes requests the court to declare it as her private property. The Court of First Instance has not investigated and verified the foregoing inconsistencies and has not clarified whose source of money was used to buy this house. Who paid money to Mrs. Hoi and Mrs. Hoi’s daughter? The Court of First Instance determined the house at No. 63/2 Cu Chinh Lan as the private property of Mrs. Mai. This decision is ungrounded and inconsistent with the statement of Mrs. Mai (common property) and statement of Mr. Tuan. The Court of First Instance compelled Mr. Tuan to repay Mrs. Mai USD 2,000 (this amount is not mentioned in the lawsuit request) without taking of depositions and conducting reconciliation between the litigants. This decision is not compliant with laws and regulations.

Considering that the taking of evidence of the Court of First Instance is so inadequate that the Court of Appeal cannot correct, it is advisable to quash the First Instance Judgment for retrial.

According to facts and matters, pursuant to Clause 1 Article 310 of the Civil Procedure Code;

HEREBY DECIDES

1. Accept the protest of the Chief Procurator of the People’s Procuracy of Nam Dinh province and partial appeal of Mr. Vu The Tuan and Mrs. Vu Hong Nhung; quash the First Instance Judgment No. 06/2016/HNGD-ST dated March 23, 2016 of the People’s Court of Nam Dinh province and refer the case file to the People’s Court of Nam Dinh province for retrial under first instance procedure.

2. Regarding court fee: Mr. Vu The Tuan and Mrs. Vu Hong Nhung are not obliged to pay appellate court fees, so each person shall receive VND 200,000 of the paid advance court fee according to the receipt No. 08568, 08569 dated March 31, 2016 of Department of Civil Judgment Enforcement of Nam Dinh province.