There is a discrepancy between the evidence and the representative glyph. The former uses 東 as a component, but the latter uses 柬 as a component.

The phonetic, "dan" argues for U+67EC. Here is another analysis (Vũ Văn Kính, "Tự điễn chứ Nôm" p. 225) showing that the traditional and simplified forms both contain U+67EC, read "lan", as phonetic.