In the morning questioning session on November 19, the panel of judges focused on clarifying the responsibility of defendant Nguyen Thuc Thuy Tien in the process of advertising, signing contracts and benefiting from selling Kera candy. Of which, the two most questioned contents are the relationship between the defendant and Sen Vang Company, along with the shareholders increasing Thuy Tien's profit ratio to 30%.
Thuy Tien speaks about the role of Sen Vang Company
When asked about the process of working with the management company (sen Vang Company), the defendant said that at the time of the incident, he was under a lot of pressure, only constantly contacting social networks and making preliminary notices about his intention to advertise candy products.
According to the statement, the defendant told the management company about the plan to make vegetable candy products, while the information from Chi Em rot Company was all received via social networks. The defendant said that he was "counselled from many sides", in which he asked Sen Vang to support him in establishing a service contract, with the goal of recording him as an "advertiser", not a "brand owner".
The panel of judges questioned the service contract signed at a late date, allegedly to separate the defendant's legal responsibility (at Thuy Tien's request, Sen Vang signed a service contract on March 7, 2025 with Chi Em rot Company but it was dated December 5, 2024, to match the first time Thuy Tien aired a Kera candy advertisement on December 12, 2024).
The court emphasized that if a fake contract was made to reduce the defendant's responsibility, the people involved could be considered signs of concealing a crime.
Reasons for increasing the profit ratio from 25% to 30%
In the interview, Thuy Tien explained the reason for the proposal to increase the benefit rate to 30%. She said that she was initially invited to participate as a representative, advertising for the product, with a small benefit level and had not raised the issue of contributing capital.
However, after hearing the product idea from her colleagues, Thuy Tien assessed this as a "very good project", seeing great potential, she wanted to participate more deeply in the operation, not just appearing as a promotional face.
From there, she proactively proposed to increase the benefit rate to 30% to match her efforts, responsibilities and level of participation.
The panel of judges raised the issue: if an individual benefits up to 30%, when a violation occurs, the responsibility must be greater than those who only hold 10%. Thuy Tien admitted and replied "yes".
Through the statement, the defendant wanted to emphasize the proposal to increase the benefit ratio to 30% due to belief in the project's potential and desire to participate in the operation.
Thuy Tien appeared in court after more than 6 months of detention. During the investigation, she, the defendants and related people voluntarily paid a total of 9.7 billion VND to remedy the consequences, of which Thuy Tien alone paid 3.2 billion VND - the highest in the group.
Also brought to trial with Thuy Tien were Nguyen Thi Thai Hang, Le Tuan Linh, Le Thanh Cong and Pham Quang Linh. According to the case file, Thuy Tien was invited to join the company from the beginning, and the profit ratio for her was adjusted after livestreaming activities attracted a large number of customers.
