Precedent No. 74/2025/AL was adopted by the Council of Justices of the Supreme People’s Court on December 24, 2025, and published under Decision No. 339a/QD-CA dated December 25, 2025, by the Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court.
1. What is a precedent?
Precedents are arguments and rulings in legally effective judgments and decisions of the Courts regarding specific cases selected by the Council of Justices of the Supreme People’s Court and published by the Chief Justice of the Supreme People’s Court as precedents for Courts to study and apply in adjudication. (Article 1 of Resolution 04/2019/NQ-HDTP)
Selected precedents must meet the following criteria:
– Have value in clarifying legal regulations with different interpretations, analyzing and explaining legal issues and events, and pointing out principles, handling methods, and legal norms to be applied in a specific case or expressing fairness for issues not yet specifically regulated by law;
– Have normative value;
– Have value in guiding the uniform application of law in adjudication.
2. Precedent No. 74/2025/AL on the determination of the crime “Theft of property” for the act of appropriating one’s own property being temporarily held by a competent authority
2.1. Source of the precedent
Criminal Appellate Judgment No. 116/2023/HS-PT dated March 31, 2023, of the High People’s Court in Da Nang regarding the case of “Murder” and “Theft of property” against defendant Ho Minh D.
Location of the precedent content:
Paragraphs 3 and 5 of the “Court’s Assessment” section.
2.2. Overview of the precedent content
– Precedent situation:
A competent authority makes an administrative violation record in the field of traffic and temporarily holds the violating vehicle of the defendant for processing. Subsequently, the defendant surreptitiously enters the area where the competent authority is temporarily holding violating vehicles and takes his own vehicle to hide it.
– Legal solution:
In this case, the defendant must be prosecuted for criminal liability for the crime of “Theft of property”.
Legal regulations related to the precedent:
Clause 1, Article 173 of the Criminal Code of Vietnam 2015 (amended and supplemented in 2017, 2024, and 2025).
Keywords of the precedent:
“Theft of property”; “Temporary holding of traffic vehicles”; “Surreptitiously appropriating traffic vehicles being temporarily held”.
CASE CONTENT:
According to the documents in the case file and the proceedings at the trial, the content of the case is summarized as follows:
Implementing the plan on patrol and control to ensure security, order, and traffic safety in Commune T, District H, Khanh Hoa Province. At around 11:00 AM on June 25, 2022, Mr. Hoang Van Y – Deputy Chief of Police of Commune T, along with the Patrol Task Force, discovered on the inter-village road (in Village M, Commune T) Cao Thi Thanh N, a friend of Ho Minh D (D has a certificate of severe hearing and speech disability), was operating a Suzuki Raider motorcycle (chassis number 11ANJV108137, engine number CGA1508220) belonging to D without a license plate, without a helmet, and without a driver’s license. Therefore, the Task Force conducted an inspection, made a violation record, and temporarily held the motorcycle, taking it to the warehouse of the People’s Committee of Commune T for management and administrative punishment.
At around 1:00 PM on July 8, 2022, Ho Minh D operated a Sirius motorcycle with license plate 79X1-02891, carrying his friend C to the People’s Committee of Commune T to request the return of the bike. D signaled towards the People’s Committee, and C understood D was inviting him along, so he got on the bike D was driving. When arriving in front of the People’s Committee area of Commune T, D signaled for C to hold the bike and wait outside so D could enter the Commune Police headquarters to retrieve the Suzuki Raider. Seeing the Suzuki Raider motorcycle parked inside the warehouse of the People’s Committee of Commune T without anyone watching, D surreptitiously opened the door, led the motorcycle out, reconnected the bike’s wires, and started the engine. D signaled for C to drive his Sirius motorcycle to C’s house, while D drove the stolen bike to hide it at his own house (Village B, Commune K, District H). At around 3:00 PM on July 9, 2022, the Police of Commune T discovered that the temporarily held Suzuki Raider was missing, so they deployed search and verification efforts. At around 6:00 PM the same day, Mr. Hoang Van Y along with Mr. Cao Van T, Cao Xuan N, Tran Thanh T1, and Dao Quang T2 (from Commune T Police), in coordination with Commune K Police, District H, went to Ho Minh D’s house to check and found the Suzuki Raider motorcycle there. They proceeded to seize the motorcycle and take it to the Commune T Police for resolution. Seeing the task force arrive at his house, D fled. At around 7:00 PM the same day, when the task force left D’s house, D returned home, took a knife about 27cm long and tucked it on the luggage rack of the Sirius bike 79X1-02891, then drove to the house of Dinh Minh T3 (a friend living in the same village), took another sword and placed it on the exhaust pipe, and chased after Mr. Hoang Van Y. When arriving in front of the area of Mr. Bo Bo T4 and Ms. Bo Bo Thi H’s house (in Village N, Commune T, District H), D saw Mr. Y driving the Suzuki Raider from Town H towards Commune T. D turned his bike back to run in the same direction, then overtook Mr. Y’s bike on the left, approached, used his right hand to grab and jerk Mr. Y’s left hand which was holding the handlebars, and simultaneously elbowed Mr. Y’s left arm with his right elbow, causing Mr. Y and the bike to fall onto the road. D turned the bike back, stopped, got off, held the knife in his right hand, used his left hand to press Mr. Y’s back down onto the road, and stabbed Mr. Hoang Van Y 04 times in the right shoulder-back and left shoulder area. Ms. Bo Bo Thi H was inside her house, heard the bike fall, and used her mobile phone to shine a light towards D; D then got on the Sirius bike and fled towards Town H. Mr. Hoang Van Y was taken to the emergency room by local people but died on the way to District H General Hospital.
Ho Minh D, after stabbing Mr. Hoang Van Y, drove the motorcycle to escape. When passing through Bridge T (in Town H), he threw the knife into the river, then ran to a sugarcane field area (in Village D, Commune S, District H) to hide the sword, and then took the bike to the Pass K area, District H, to hide. At around 8:00 AM on July 10, 2022, while D was hiding in Village B, Commune K, District H, the Police Investigation Agency discovered and arrested him.
According to Forensic Examination Conclusion on DNA No. 3193-2022/ADN by the Ho Chi Minh City Forensic Center, from the specimens including: blood sample of Hoang Van Y; 01 pair of sandals with cream-colored soles and red-cream straps with the word “NIKE” (submitted by Ho Minh D); fingernail and toenail samples of Ho Minh D; 01 black long-sleeved jacket with brown fur-like interior and elastic cuffs (submitted by Ho Minh D). Conclusion: Hoang Van Y’s DNA was present in the stains on the left elastic cuff.
According to Autopsy Forensic Examination Conclusion No. 308/TT-TTPY dated July 18, 2022, of the Khanh Hoa Provincial Forensic Center, the cause of death of Mr. Hoang Van Y was: Respiratory failure, circulatory failure due to penetrating back wounds causing lung perforation, consistent with sharp objects; direction from back to front, outside to inside, right to left.
According to Property Valuation Conclusion No. 3173/KL-HDDGTS dated August 16, 2022, of the Property Valuation Council in Criminal Proceedings of Khanh Hoa Province, the value of the red-black Suzuki Raider motorcycle, chassis number 11ANJV108137, engine number CGA1508220, license plate 79D1-539.68 at the time of July 8, 2022, in District H was 22,800,000 VND.
In First-Instance Criminal Judgment No. 129/2022/HSST dated December 7, 2022, the People’s Court of Khanh Hoa Province decided:
Pursuant to Points d and n, Clause 1, Article 123; Clause 1, Article 173 of the Penal Code; Points b, p, s, Clause 1 and Clause 2, Article 51; Article 55 of the Penal Code;
– Sentence defendant Ho Minh D to life imprisonment for the crime of “Murder”.
– Sentence defendant Ho Minh D to 09 months in prison for the crime of “Theft of property”.
The aggregate penalty that defendant Ho Minh D must serve is life imprisonment. The term of the penalty starts from the date of detention, July 10, 2022.
In addition, the first-instance judgment also decided on the handling of exhibits, civil liability, court fees, and the right to appeal in accordance with the law.
On December 20, 2022, Mr. Hoang Van T, the authorized representative of the legal representatives of the victim, Mrs. Luan Thi H1 and Mrs. Nguyen Thi H2, filed an appeal requesting the application of the death penalty for the defendant and requesting clarification of other accomplices and consideration of the acts of concealing or failing to denounce the crime.
At the appellate trial, the appellant maintained the appeal.
The representative of the High People’s Procuracy in Da Nang requested the Trial Panel not to accept the appeal and to uphold the first-instance judgment.
The defense lawyer’s argument requested not to accept the appellant’s appeal and to uphold the first-instance judgment.
THE COURT’S ASSESSMENT:
[1] Based on the content of the case; pursuant to the documents in the case file that were examined at the trial and the results of the arguments at the trial; the Trial Panel assesses:
[2] Regarding the content:
[3] At the appellate trial, the defendant confessed to the acts he committed exactly as stated in the first-instance judgment. The defendant’s testimony is consistent with the witnesses’ testimonies and other documents and evidence in the case file, providing sufficient grounds to conclude: At around 1:00 PM on July 8, 2022, taking advantage of the lack of supervision at the warehouse of the People’s Committee of Commune T, Ho Minh D surreptitiously entered to steal a Suzuki Raider motorcycle (chassis number 11ANJV108137, engine number CGA1508220) without a license plate, valued at 22,800,000 VND, which was being held under administrative seizure by the Police of Commune T, District H, Khanh Hoa Province, and took it to hide at his house (Village B, Commune K, District H).
[4] At around 7:00 PM on July 9, 2022, after Mr. Hoang Van Y, Deputy Chief of Police of Commune T, in coordination with the Police of Commune K, District H, worked at Ho Minh D’s house and seized the Suzuki Raider motorcycle to return it to the Commune T Police headquarters, Ho Minh D drove his motorcycle to chase Mr. Hoang Van Y. When arriving in front of the area of Mr. Bo Bo T4 and Ms. Bo Bo Thi H’s house in Village N, Commune T, District H, D drove his bike close and used his hand to jerk the handlebars, causing Mr. Hoang Van Y to fall. D got off the bike, held a knife, and stabbed Mr. Hoang Van Y repeatedly in the right shoulder-back and left shoulder area, penetrating the back and causing lung perforation. As a result, Mr. Hoang Van Y died due to respiratory and circulatory failure.
[5] Thus, the defendant took advantage of the lack of supervision to surreptitiously steal the Suzuki Raider motorcycle being held under administrative seizure by the Police of Commune T, District H, Khanh Hoa Province, and took it to hide at his house. Therefore, the first-instance Court’s determination that the defendant committed the crime of “Theft of property” under Clause 1, Article 173 of the Penal Code is well-founded and lawful.
[6] The defendant was aware that Mr. Y was a police officer of Commune T performing his assigned functions and duties to recover the defendant’s motorcycle (the traffic violation vehicle) for handling according to the law. However, the defendant intentionally used a knife to stab the victim repeatedly in the back and shoulder area, leading to Mr. Y’s death. Therefore, the People’s Court of Khanh Hoa Province’s trial of defendant Ho Minh D for the crime of “Murder” as prescribed in Points d and n, Clause 1, Article 123 of the Penal Code is well-founded, against the right person, and for the right crime.
[7] Considering the appeal of the victim’s legal representative, the Trial Panel finds:
[8] Regarding the penalty for the defendant: Ho Minh D’s criminal behavior was particularly serious, depriving a person performing public duties of their life, causing pain and loss to the victim’s family, and simultaneously infringing upon the property management rights of the competent authority. Therefore, a very strict penalty must be applied to the defendant to be effective in the fight against crime. The appellant argued that the defendant did not have a severe disability and that the killing of Mr. Y after the bike was stolen and recovered was driven by base motives, thus requesting the death penalty. It is observed through documents and reality that the defendant has a severe hearing and speech disability. Although the defendant committed two crimes, there are insufficient grounds to consider them as having base motives. During the investigation and at the trial, the defendant confessed truthfully and repented. The defendant’s parents have compensated the victim’s representative 150,000,000 VND, so mitigating factors for criminal liability under Points p and s, Clause 1 and Clause 2, Article 51 of the Penal Code are applied. Therefore, the first-instance Court’s sentence of life imprisonment for “Murder” and 09 months in prison for “Theft of property” for defendant Ho Minh D ensures strictness and is appropriate and lawful. Therefore, there is no basis to accept the appellant’s request to increase the penalty to death.
[9] Regarding the request to consider other accomplices and the acts of concealing or failing to denounce the crime: According to the evidence during the investigation and at the trials, there are grounds to determine that only the defendant committed the crime, without prior discussion or help from others; hence, there is no basis to determine other accomplices. After the crime, the defendant was arrested the next morning; those who knew the defendant committed the crime had contacted and requested the defendant to surrender and turn in the relevant evidence. There is also no basis to determine acts of concealing or failing to denounce the crime. At today’s trial, the victim’s legal representative appealed but did not present any new documents or evidence to prove their request, so there is no basis to accept this content of the appeal.
[10] Regarding appellate criminal court fees: The victim’s legal representative does not have to pay appellate criminal court fees.
For these reasons,
DECISION:
Pursuant to Point a, Clause 1, Article 355; Article 356 of the Criminal Procedure Code; Resolution No. 326/2016/UBTVQH14 dated December 30, 2016, of the National Assembly Standing Committee on court fees and charges.
1. Do not accept the appeal of the victim’s legal representative; uphold First-Instance Criminal Judgment No. 129/2022/HSST dated December 7, 2022, of the People’s Court of Khanh Hoa Province.
Pursuant to Points d and n, Clause 1, Article 123; Clause 1, Article 173 of the Penal Code; Points b, p, s, Clause 1 and Clause 2, Article 51; Article 55 of the Penal Code;
– Sentence defendant Ho Minh D to life imprisonment for the crime of “Murder”.
– Sentence defendant Ho Minh D to 09 months in prison for the crime of “Theft of property”.
The aggregate penalty that defendant Ho Minh D must serve is life imprisonment. The term of the penalty starts from the date of detention, July 10, 2022.
2. Regarding court fees: The victim’s legal representative does not have to pay appellate criminal court fees.
3. Other decision parts of the first-instance judgment that were not appealed or protested have taken legal effect since the expiration of the time limit for appeal or protest.
The appellate judgment takes legal effect from the date of pronouncement.
PRECEDENT CONTENT
“[3] At the appellate trial, the defendant confessed to the acts he committed exactly as stated in the first-instance judgment. The defendant’s testimony is consistent with the witnesses’ testimonies and other documents and evidence in the case file, providing sufficient grounds to conclude: At around 1:00 PM on July 8, 2022, taking advantage of the lack of supervision at the warehouse of the People’s Committee of Commune T, Ho Minh D surreptitiously entered to steal a Suzuki Raider motorcycle (chassis number 11ANJV108137, engine number CGA1508220) without a license plate, valued at 22,800,000 VND, which was being held under administrative seizure by the Police of Commune T, District H, Khanh Hoa Province, and took it to hide at his house (Village B, Commune K, District H).“.
“[5] Thus, the defendant took advantage of the lack of supervision to surreptitiously steal the Suzuki Raider motorcycle being held under administrative seizure by the Police of Commune T, District H, Khanh Hoa Province, and took it to hide at his house. Therefore, the first-instance Court’s determination that the defendant committed the crime of “Theft of property” under Clause 1, Article 173 of the Penal Code is well-founded and lawful.”.
