DCCC508/2025

DCCC508/2025

A A B B DCCC 508/2025 C [2026] HKDC 16 C D D IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E CRIMINAL CASE NO 508 OF 2025 F F G -------------------------------------- G HKSAR H H v I CHIN CHOK LOON I --------------------------------------- J J K Before: His Honour Judge E Yip K Date: 2 January 2026 L L Present: Ms Sabrina See, counsel on fiat, for HKSAR M Mr Andrew Christopher Leung, instructed by Johnny K K M Leung & Co, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the N N Defendant O Offence: Theft（盜竊罪） O P P ---------------------------------------- Q Q REASONS FOR SENTENCE R ---------------------------------------- R S S T T U U V V  -2- A A B B The Charge C C 1. The Defendant, Chin Chok Loon (“the Defendant”), pleaded D D guilty to one charge of Theft, contrary to section 9 of the Theft Ordinance E (Cap. 210). The plea was indicated at the time of listing for the proceedings. E F F 2. The offence arises from the Defendant’s dishonest G appropriation of cash belonging to his employer, Circle K Convenience G Stores (HK) Limited, between 3 June 2024 and 6 June 2024, in the total H H sum of HK$341,985.30. I I Facts of the Case J J K 3. At the material time, the Defendant was employed as the K branch manager of a Circle K convenience store situated at Hennessy Road, L L Causeway Bay. As branch manager, he was entrusted with the M responsibility of overseeing the daily operations of the store and, in M particular, of ensuring that the cash revenue of each business day was N N properly tallied and handed over to the security company engaged by Circle O K on the following day. O P P 4. On a routine audit, the district manager of Circle K discovered Q discrepancies between the cash revenue that ought to have been received Q and that which was in fact delivered to the security company. These R R discrepancies covered the period from 3 June 2024 to 5 June 2024 and S amounted to HK$283,085.30. Further investigation revealed that an S additional HK$56,400 of revenue from 6 June 2024, as well as HK$2,500 T T kept in the store safe, were also missing. U U V V  -3- A A B B C 5. The total amount of missing funds was therefore C HK$341,985.30. D D E 6. On 7 June 2024, when confronted by the district manager, the E Defendant admitted that he had taken all the missing sums. He explained F F that he had done so for the purpose of unfreezing his online investment G account. His employment was immediately terminated and the matter was G reported to the police. H H I 7. Upon arrest on the same day, the Defendant admitted under I caution that he had committed the offence. In a subsequent cautioned J J interview, he gave a full account of his actions. He confirmed that he alone K was responsible, that he had deposited the stolen cash into his personal K bank account, and that the total amount taken was HK$341,985.30. L L M Personal Circumstances and Mitigation M N N 8. The Defendant is 54 years old. He has no previous O convictions and is therefore a first offender. He has a degree in commerce O and had been gainfully employed for many years, including employment P P with Circle K since 2018. Q Q 9. The Court has considered the Defendant’s personal R R circumstances as set out in the mitigation. He is single, lives alone in Hong S Kong, and has no immediate family here. He suffers from HIV and is S required to take medication on a daily basis. T T U U V V  -4- A A B B 10. The Defendant explained that he committed the offence C because he believed he needed to deposit further funds to unfreeze a C cryptocurrency investment account. He was subsequently scammed and D D lost not only the stolen money but also his own prior investment. E E 11. The Defendant admitted his wrongdoing at the earliest F F opportunity, both to his employer and to the police. He has expressed G remorse, and his early guilty plea has saved the court time and spared G witnesses from having to testify. H H I Sentencing Considerations I J J 12. This is a clear case of theft involving a breach of trust. The K Defendant was the branch manager of the store. He was entrusted with K day-to-day control over the store’s cash revenue and was expected to act L L honestly and responsibly in safeguarding his employer’s property. His M poor judgment upon being deceived by others does not justify stealing from M one’s employer. N N O 13. The Court accepts that his medical condition had been a O matter of personal hardship and anxiety for him but this does not qualify P P as a mitigating factor. Q Q 14. Although the period over which the theft occurred was R R relatively short, namely a few days, the Defendant had abused the trust S reposed in him to appropriate a substantial sum of money for his own S purposes. Such conduct must be treated with appropriate seriousness. T T U U V V  -5- A A B B 15. The Court has been referred to the relevant authorities C concerning theft involving breach of trust. The applicable sentencing C guideline indicates that where the amount involved is between D D HK$250,000 and HK$1,000,000, the normal starting point after trial falls E within the range of 2 to 3 years’ imprisonment, subject to adjustment E depending on the circumstances of the case. F F G 16. Having regard to the amount stolen being HK$341,985.30, G the Defendant being the branch manager in breach of trust, the relatively H H short duration of the offence, the Court takes a starting point of 27 months’ I imprisonment. I J J 17. The Defendant indicated a guilty plea at an early stage and K pleaded guilty before this Court. He is entitled to the full one-third K discount. Applying a one-third discount to the starting point of 27 months’ L L imprisonment, the sentence is 18 months. M M N N O ( E Yip ) O District Judge P P Q Q R R S S T T U U V V