<p>The intersection between legal semiotics and statutory interpretation remains largely underexplored within Vietnam’s legal scholarship and judicial practice. This article addresses this gap by examining Case Law No. 58/2023/AL, a landmark case concerning wildlife crime, through the dual lenses of legal semiotics and the golden rule of statutory interpretation. The study aims to demonstrate how semiotic reasoning operates implicitly in Vietnamese judicial decision-making and how the golden rule, as a semiotic technique, contributes to achieving justice through interpretive flexibility. Employing a qualitative case study approach, the research combines textual analysis of the precedent, comparative examination of common law interpretive methods, and contextual reflection on Vietnam’s statutory framework and legal education. The findings reveal that Vietnamese courts have begun to adopt interpretive practices resembling semiotic reasoning, though often unconsciously, and that minor grammatical and syntactic elements in legislative drafting may significantly influence judicial meaning-making. The study contributes to the emerging field of legal semiotics in Vietnam by highlighting the semiotic dimensions of legal reasoning and proposing the integration of semiotic analysis into legislative techniques and legal education reform. Ultimately, it argues that an awareness of legal semiosis not only enhances interpretive precision but also deepens the normative understanding of justice within Vietnam’s evolving legal culture.</p>