Verdict no. 385/2017/HS-ST dated december 12, 2017 on snatching

PEOPLE’S COURT OF HANOI CITY

VERDICT NO. 385/2017/HS-ST DATED DECEMBER 12, 2017 ON SNATCHING

On December 12, 2017, the first-instance trial court was conducted at the office of People’s Court of Hanoi City to hear the criminal case No. 437/2017/HSST dated November 6, 2017. Parties concerned:

Defendant Tong Viet THT; born in …, in Hanoi; registered place of permanent residence and address: ..., Hanoi City; occupation: self-employed; education level: 12/12, nationality: Vietnam; ethnicity: Kinh; Religion: none; father’s name: Mr. Tong VTV and mother’s name: Mrs. Dao KOK; wife’s name: Mrs. Nguyen HNH (born in …). and 02 children (born in 2015); previous administrative penalties, previous convictions: none; criminal record: in 2001 and in 2003; undergoing 12-month compulsory detoxification in both times; be caught red-handed and arrested and temporarily detained from May 2, 2017; present.

Aggrieved party: Mr. Y…; date of birth….; nationality: Korean; passport No….; address in Korea: ...; temporary address in Vietnam: ..., Hanoi City; left Vietnam on May 2, 2017; absent.

FINDING THAT

* The defendant Tong Viet THT was prosecuted by Hanoi City People's Procuracy on criminal offense as follows:

About 16:00 on May 2, 2017, Tong Viet THT rode the Honda Wave green motorbike (license plate No. 29 S3-...) from his house (Street...) to his mother-in-law’s house (…) to pick up his child. Approaching the Street… and seeing a foreigner (Mr. Y…) standing next to the sidewalk (in front of the house No….) with a black Samsung Galaxy Note 4 phone in front of his face in his left hand, Tong Viet THT came up with the intention to snatch this phone. Tong Viet THT rode the motorbike closely to Mr. Y…, used his right hand to snatch the phone, and then rode away about 5 meters, he collided with another motorbike and fell, the phone was thrown on the street. Tong Viet THT rose the motorbike up, intended to keep running off. He was chased, arrested and taken to the Ward Office by Mr. Y together with some citizens.

The investigating body seized the following evidence:  a blue Wave motorbike (license plate No. 29S3-…), 1 Mobell phone and 1 black Samsung Galaxy Note 4 phone.

Valuation Conclusion No. 93/KL-HDDG dated May 6, 2017 of Asset Valuation Council in Criminal Proceedings of Hoan Kiem District (case file p.26) determines that:  the value of the black Samsung Galaxy Note 4 phone is VND 4,790,000 (Four million seven hundred ninety thousand dong).

The blue Wave motorbike (license plate No. 29S3-…) is owned by Mrs. Nguyen HNH (born in …., Tong Viet THT's wife).  Mrs. NHN did not know THT used the motorbike to commit the offense, the investigating body dealt with the evidence and returned it to Mrs. NHN (case file p. 21); Mrs. NHN received the motorbike back and does not make any civil request.

The Mobell phone of Tong Viet THT is used for personal communication, not related to the offense.

With regard to aggrieved party:  On May 2, 2017 (case file p. 29), the investigating body returned Mr. Y… the Samsung Galaxy Note 4 phone; Mr. Y…received the snatched phone back without any civil request.

* In the Indictment No. 341/CT-VKS-P2 dated October 23, 2017, the People’s Procuracy of Hanoi City prosecuted the defendant Tong Viet THT for “Snatching of property” as prescribed in Point d Clause 2 Article 136 of Criminal Code.

* At the first instance court hearing:  The defendant Tong Viet THT sincerely declared his crime acts of riding the motorbike closely, snatching the foreigner’s mobile phone and fleeing as declared at the investigating body and in the Indictment; and asked for the leniency of the law and mitigation of punishment.

Prosecutor of Hanoi People's Procuracy makes an arraignment against the defendant, upholds the prosecution decision according to the Indictment, requests the Trial Panel to apply Point d, Clause 2, Article 136, and Point p of Clause 1 Article 46 of Criminal Code; sentence the defendant Tong Viet THT to 42 months to 48 months in prison on charges of snatching of property; no additional penalties apply to the defendant; decide to confiscate for destruction of the defendant’s mobile phone.

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 procurators of defendants and other involved parties,

CONSIDERING THAT

The defendant's depositions at today's trial is in accordance with his depositions made at the investigating body, statements of the aggrieved party and witnesses, in conformity with the report of offence caught in the act, exhibits seized, asset valuation conclusion and other documents and evidence included in the case file. There are sufficient grounds for concluding that: About 16:30 on May 2, 2017, at the sidewalk in front of the house No…  (in Ward…, Hanoi City), Tong Viet THT rode a Honda Wave motorbike closely and suddenly snatched 01 mobile phone (a black Samsung Galaxy Note 4, VND 4,790,000) of the foreigner Mr. Y…  (nationality: ...) and then run away; Tong Viet THT's act is guilty of “Snatching of property” with the aggravating factor “Employing dangerous methods”; the offense and sentence prescribed in Point d Clause 2 Article 136 of the Criminal Code; the Indictment prosecuting Tong Viet THT for the count and cited provision was well-grounded and accordant with the law.

The defendant’s offense is very serious, directly infringing property ownership of others, disturbing the peace in Hanoi City, adversely affecting the civilized image of the people of Hanoi in the eyes of foreigners and also threatening the health of others, so the defendant should be strictly sanctioned for reform, education and general prevention.

The defendant Tong Viet THT has no aggravating factors under the provisions of Clause 1, Article 48 of the Criminal Code; the defendant has faced 02 administrative penalties (in 2001 and 2003, undergoing 12-month compulsory detoxification). Although he is deemed not facing administrative penalties as the statutory time limit is expired, he still has bad record, deliberately committed very serious crime regardless of many reforms and education times, and he is also a drug addict. Therefore, it is necessary to isolate him from the social life for certain period equivalent to a severe penalty for corresponding reform, education and general prevention; the Trial Panel also consider his “cooperative attitude” as a mitigating factor as prescribed in Point p Clause 1 Article 46 of the Criminal Code to grant Tong Viet THT a commutation.

Regarding additional penalties:  The defendant has financial difficulties, has no job and unstable income, so the Trial Panel does not apply additional penalties against the defendant under Clause 5 Article 136 of the Criminal Code.

Regarding civil restitution: The property appropriated the defendant was revoked and returned to the owner by the investing body; the aggrieved party received the property and did not claim for civil restitution, so the Trial Panel does not consider and resolve civil restitution.

With reference to exhibits: The investigating body seized the defendant’s Mobell phone (including sim card); investigation findings determine that the defendant often uses this phone for private communication, not related to the offense; at the first instance court hearing, the defendant confirms that this phone is old and broken and requests for destruction, so the Trial Panel bases on Point d Clause 2 Article 76 of the Criminal Procedure Code to recognize such request to destroy the phone.

The investigating body dealt with other exhibits within their competence which was not subject to dispute, so the Trial Panel does not consider it further.

With reference to court fees: The defendant has not pay the first instance criminal court fee as prescribed in Clause 2 Article 99 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Point a Clause 1 Article 23 of Resolution on Court Fees and Charges.

With reference to appeal:  The defendant and the aggrieved party have the right to appeal as prescribed in Article 231 and Article 234 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Based on the above-mentioned facts and matters,

HEREBY DECIDES

1. Declare the defendant Tong Viet THT guilty of snatching of property;

- Pursuant to Point d Clause 2 Article 136 and Point p Clause 1 Article 46 of the Criminal Code of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam;

- Sentence the defendant Tong Viet THT to 42 (forty two) months in prison, prison term commences from May 2, 2017.

- Do not apply additional penalties to the defendant Tong Viet THT.

2. Pursuant to Point dd Clause 2 Article 76 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam:

Confiscate for destruction 01 Mobell phone (including sim card) seized from the defendant and kept at Department of Civil Judgment Enforcement of Hanoi City (according to the record of exhibit handover dated November 16, 2017).

3. Pursuant to Clause 2 Article 99 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam and Point a Clause 1 Article 23 of Resolution No. 326/2016/UBTVQH14 on court fees and charges: Compel the defendant Tong Viet THT to pay VND 200,000 of first instance criminal court fee.

4. Pursuant to Article 231 and 234 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam:

- The defendant Tong Viet THT has the right to appeal the Verdict within 15 days from the date of pronouncement.

- The aggrieved party Mr. Y…  (who is present at the court hearing) has the right to appeal the Verdict within 15 days from the date of which the Verdict is received.