區域法院（刑事）Deputy District Judge M Chow14/10/2025[2025] HKDC 1791
DCCC1399/2024
A A
B B
DCCC 1399/2024
C [2025] HKDC 1791 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 1399 OF 2024
F F
G ----------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
v
I CHEUNG SIU LEUNG I
-----------------------------
J J
K Before: Deputy District Judge M Chow K
Date: 15 October 2025
L L
Present: Mr Martin CHAU, Public Prosecutor, for HKSAR/Director of
M Public Prosecutions M
Mr MA Ming Chun Duncan, instructed by Huen & Cheung,
N N
for the defendant
O Offence: [1] Theft (盜竊罪) O
P
[2] Conspiracy to steal (串謀偷竊) P
Q Q
-----------------------------------------
R REASONS FOR SENTENCE R
-----------------------------------------
S S
T T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
1. The Defendant pleaded guilty to 2 charges:-
C C
1
(a) Theft of $3.3 million company money between Feb
D D
2022 and March 2023;
E E
(b) Conspiracy to steal2 from a pawnshop between
F F
4/10/2023 and 16/1/2024.
G G
(i) 30 watches;
H H
I (ii) 36 rings; I
J J
(iii) 22 necklaces with pendants;
K K
(iv) 7 pairs of earrings;
L L
M (v) 11 pendants; M
N N
(vi) 37 wrist chains;
O O
(vii) 62 bracelets;
P P
Q (viii) 49 necklaces; Q
R R
(ix) 1 watch chain;
S S
1
Contrary to section 9 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap. 210
T 2
Contrary to section 9 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap. 210 and sections 159A and 159C of the Crimes T
Ordinance, Cap. 200.
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
C (x) 7 ornaments; C
D D
(xi) 4 packets of diamond.
E E
Summary of facts
F F
G 2. Shing Wo Pawn Shop was a family owned business. Mr Chu G
was one of the shareholders. He had the responsibility of the daily
H H
management of the pawnshop. While PW1’s brothers live in overseas also
I inherited the shares of the company. PW1 received $25,000 per month I
from the pawnshop on behalf of his brothers.
J J
K 3. The Defendant was the manager of the pawnshop for over 30 K
years. One of his duties :-
L L
M (a) was to handle the safe (he was the only person to have M
the safe’s passcode and keys) which stored the shop’s
N N
cash and pawned properties;
O O
(b) reporting to PW1 of the daily turnover;
P P
Q (c) passing the pawned properties to another staff of the Q
shop for making record and wrapping for storage;
R R
S (d) receiving cash from customers when they redeemed the S
pawned properties;
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
(e) Since 2023, the Defendant was further authorized to
C dispose of the pawned properties by way of reselling C
them when customers failed to redeem within 4 months.
D D
E 4. In late 2022 to mid 2023, the company failed to pay PW1’s E
elder brothers monthly $25,000 entitlement.
F F
G 5. In mid 2023, Mr Chu told PW1 that the Defendant had taken G
cash from the company for running his own business and the Defendant
H H
had failed to pay back.
I I
6. In May 2023, Mr Chu transferred his shares to PW1, soon
J J
afterwards, Mr Chu passed away.
K K
7. PW2 was then appointed as a consultant of the company. His
L L
main duty was to supervise the Defendant.
M M
8. At the meantime, the Defendant promised PW1 to repay the
N N
stolen cash of $3.3 million as soon as possible.
O O
9. On 28 October 2023, the Defendant wrote a confession note
P P
that he had stolen $3.3 million from the company.
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
18 January 2024
C C
10. On 18 January 2024, PW2 found the company had a shortage
D D
of cash. The Defendant admitted to PW2:-
E E
(a) That he had stolen customers’ pawned properties and;
F F
G (b) Took out 121 pawn tickets dated between Oct 2023 to G
January 2024;
H H
I (c) These 121 tickets were issued by 2 other pawn shops; I
J J
(d) All the pawn tickets showed that the properties were
K pawned by Wong Ning-yat. K
L L
11. PW2 also found that the safe was almost empty. 90% of the
M properties were missing. M
N N
12. PW2 then got the keys back from the Defendant and
O dismissed him. O
P P
19 January 2024
Q Q
13. A report was made to the police and the Defendant was
R R
arrested on the same day.
S S
T T
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
14. Investigation revealed that various items as stated in charge 2,
C some have been pawned by WONG Ning-yat (“WONG”) between 2022 to C
2024, while 2 watches and 24 pieces of jewellery could not be recovered.
D D
E 15. The total value of the stolen properties was about $2,150,500 E
in charge 2.
F F
G 16. Under caution, the Defendant said that:- G
H H
(a) WONG had asked him for money to pay for his legal
I fees everyday. As he ran out of money, he took the I
company properties to WONG for him to pawn at
J J
nearby pawn shops for money;
K K
(b) He redeemed the company‘s properties when WONG
L L
repaid him;
M M
(c) He had pawned about 120 items.
N N
O Background O
P P
17. The Defendant is 64 years old with a clear record. In 2023, he
Q had a fight with WONG and ended up with a binding over order for an Q
offence of “fighting in a public place”.
R R
S 18. Before his remand, he lived with his long term girlfriend. S
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
19. During his guilty plea in District Court in July 2025, he was
C remanded in Queen Mary Hospital Custodial Ward due to a surgery of his C
right eye as he has been diagnosed to suffer from serious macular hole in
D D
both eyes.
E E
20. The doctor said that his vision was left with only 20% (right
F F
eye) and 10% (left eye). Although he has an operation on his right eye in
G June 2025, his eye condition has not been improved. Today, I have an G
updated medical report to inform me that the Defendant’s visual acuity is
H H
1/60 his right eye and 0.5/60 left eye. That means he is close to blindness.
I This has a huge negative impact in his daily life. I
J J
21. As to the reasons for him to commit the present offences, he
K said that:- K
L L
(a) In September 2018, WONG approached him and
M offered to sell the Defendant‘s diamond rings M
($800,000) in Dubai for a higher price;
N N
O (b) Given the impression that WONG had apparent O
experience in international luxury goods trading, the
P P
Defendant agreed to the arrangement;
Q Q
(c) When WONG arrived in Dubai, he claimed to be
R R
detained because the diamond was allegedly a
S counterfeit one and he requested $400,000 urgently S
from the Defendant;
T T
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
(d) When WONG claimed to contract middle east
C respiratory syndrome, the Defendant transferred more C
funds as requested by Wong;
D D
E (e) WONG subsequently claimed to own 2 million Bitcoin E
and proposed to sell them to the Defendant, but
F F
required more money from him again. The Defendant
G fell into the trap and provided more money to WONG; G
H H
(f) Over time, WONG continued to prey on the
I Defendant’s naivety who continued to transfer all his I
personal funds ($7 million) to him;
J J
K (g) At the end, the Defendant stole company properties and K
fund to pay WONG, in the hope that WONG would
L L
return the money to him;
M M
(h) The Defendant did not have any personal gain from
N N
committing the present offences.
O O
Sentence
P P
Q 22. The defence accepted that it is a case of breach of trust. Q
R R
23. The Defendant worked in the victim company for 30 years
S and was entrusted with a huge responsibility to take care of all the pawned S
properties and cash in the shop.
T T
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
24. He made used of his position to abuse the trust that the
C company had imposed on him. C
D D
25. In HKSAR v. Ng Kwok Wing 3, the 2nd and the 3rd bands of
E HKSAR v. Cheung Mee Kiu4 has been adjusted :- E
F F
(a) $3 million to 15 million - 5 to 10 years;
G G
(b) $1 million to $3 million - 3 to 5 years.
H H
I 26. The defence also referred to the case of HKSAR v Lee Lai Kit I
Kitty5 that there are a number of factors to be considered in sentencing at
J J
paragraph 23 of the judgement:
K K
“23. …
L (i) the quality and degree of trust reposed in the offender L
including his rank;
(ii) the period over which the fraud or the thefts have been
M M
perpetrated;
(iii) the use to which the money or property dishonestly taken
N was put; N
(iv) the effect upon the victim;
(v) the impact of the offences on the public and public
O confidence; O
(vi) the effect upon fellow-employees or partners;
P (vii) the effect on the offender himself; P
(viii) his own history;
(ix) those matters of mitigation special to himself such as
Q illness; being placed under great strain by excessive Q
responsibility or the like; where, as happens, there has been a
long delay, say over two years, between his being confronted
R R
with his dishonesty by his professional body or the police and
S 3 S
HKSAR v Ng Kwok Wing [2008] 4 HKLRD 1017
4
HKSAR v. Cheung Mee Kiu [2006] 4 HKLRD 776
T T
5
HKSAR v. LEE LAI KIT KITTY CACC 379/2008
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
B the start of his trial; finally, any help given by him to the B
police.”
C C
27. In the present case :-
D D
E (a) The Defendant was entrusted with sole responsibility E
of taking care of the safe which was the place to keep
F F
all the pawned properties by the customers. That means
G the level of trust reposed on the defendant was on the G
highest level, he has full control and custody of all the
H H
pawned properties and cash. The Defendant basically
I had free hand to run the pawn shop and to deal with all I
the cash and pawned items;
J J
K (b) The stolen properties in charge 2 amount to 266 pieces K
of items. Those pawned items have high resell value,
L L
such as Rolex watches and jewellery;
M M
(c) The period of the 2 charges:-
N N
O O
(i) Charge 1 - about 13 months6;
P P
(ii) Charge 2 - about 3.5 months7.
Q Q
R R
S S
6
Between February 2022 and March 2023
T T
7
Between 4th day of October, 2023 and the 16th day of January, 2024 (both dates inclusive)
U U
V V
- 11 -
A A
B B
That means it is not a one off incident, the perpetuated
C offences committed over multiple times for an C
extended period , especially in charge 1.
D D
E (d) Charge 2 was commited after he confessioned to PW1 E
that he had stolen $3.3 million from the company. So,
F F
on one hand he made confession, on the other hand he
G continued to steal, that should be viewed as an G
aggravating factor.
H H
I I
(e) As stated in the summary of facts that in mid 2023, Mr
J Chu told PW1 that the Defendant had taken the J
company cash to run his own business and had failed to
K K
pay back;
L L
(f) From what the defence allegedly said that the defendant
M M
had been fallen into the prey of WONG’s trap since
N 2018. The Defendant kept transferring money to N
WONG and emptied the pawn shop’s safe to pay
O O
WONG. In August 2022, the Defendant realised that he
P had been cheated by WONG together with another P
person and made a report to the police.
Q Q
R (g) However, nothing had stopped him to wake up from R
this perpetrated fraud. The Defendant continued to steal
S S
from the pawnshop even when he realised that the shop
T owner was aware of what he had done with the T
company cash and the pawned items, including the fact
U U
V V
- 12 -
A A
B B
that the Defendant had written a confession note of
C stealing 3.3 million from the company in Oct 2023. C
D D
28. That means the company cash registry had dried up by the
E Defendant thievish acts (bearing in mind the company could not pay E
PW1’s brother’s monthly entitlement of $25,000 since late 2022). The
F F
Defendant then turned to steal from those pawned items.
G G
29. The defence accepted that there was an aggravating factor in
H H
charge 2 as it was committed after he made confession to PW1 of the
I stealing of 3.3 million in charge 2. I
J J
30. The stolen cash in charge 1 is $3.3 million and the value of
K K
the stolen properties in charge 2 was $2.15 million. The total amount of the
L 2 charges is $5,150,500.00. L
M M
31. Taking into account of the above factors, I consider that the
N N
appropriate starting point for each charge is as follow:-
O O
(a) Charge 1 - the starting point is 5 years 8 , given 1/3
P P
discount, the sentence reduces to 40 months.
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
8
60 months
U U
V V
- 13 -
A A
B B
(b) Charge 2 - the starting point is 4 years, enhanced by 3
C months (aggravating factor) 9, given 1/3 discount, the C
sentence is now reduced to 34 months.
D D
E Totality E
F F
32. I order 10 months from charge 2 to run consecutively to
G charge 1. It makes up to a total of 50 months’ imprisonment10. G
H H
Reduction of sentence
I I
33. The prosecution accepted that when the Defendant was
J J
arrested in January 2024, he has been cooperated with the police as this
K case involved a large number of stolen properties (altogether 266 pieces of K
pawned items). Without his co-operation, the investigation conducted by
L L
the police would have been long and tedious. As such, I reduce the sentence
M by 3 months. M
N N
34. I further reduce the sentence by another 3 months in view of
O the health condition of the Defendant. O
P P
11
35. The final sentence comes down to 44 months’ imprisonment .
Q Q
R R
S 9 S
48+3=51 months
10
40 months + 10 months
T T
11
50 months – 3 months – 3 months
U U
V V
- 14 -
A A
B B
36. The Defendant is order to serve a period of 44 months’
C imprisonment for both charges. C
D D
E E
( M Chow )
F Deputy District Judge F
G G
H H
I I
J J
K K
L L
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
A A
B B
DCCC 1399/2024
C [2025] HKDC 1791 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 1399 OF 2024
F F
G ----------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
v
I CHEUNG SIU LEUNG I
-----------------------------
J J
K Before: Deputy District Judge M Chow K
Date: 15 October 2025
L L
Present: Mr Martin CHAU, Public Prosecutor, for HKSAR/Director of
M Public Prosecutions M
Mr MA Ming Chun Duncan, instructed by Huen & Cheung,
N N
for the defendant
O Offence: [1] Theft (盜竊罪) O
P
[2] Conspiracy to steal (串謀偷竊) P
Q Q
-----------------------------------------
R REASONS FOR SENTENCE R
-----------------------------------------
S S
T T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
1. The Defendant pleaded guilty to 2 charges:-
C C
1
(a) Theft of $3.3 million company money between Feb
D D
2022 and March 2023;
E E
(b) Conspiracy to steal2 from a pawnshop between
F F
4/10/2023 and 16/1/2024.
G G
(i) 30 watches;
H H
I (ii) 36 rings; I
J J
(iii) 22 necklaces with pendants;
K K
(iv) 7 pairs of earrings;
L L
M (v) 11 pendants; M
N N
(vi) 37 wrist chains;
O O
(vii) 62 bracelets;
P P
Q (viii) 49 necklaces; Q
R R
(ix) 1 watch chain;
S S
1
Contrary to section 9 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap. 210
T 2
Contrary to section 9 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap. 210 and sections 159A and 159C of the Crimes T
Ordinance, Cap. 200.
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
C (x) 7 ornaments; C
D D
(xi) 4 packets of diamond.
E E
Summary of facts
F F
G 2. Shing Wo Pawn Shop was a family owned business. Mr Chu G
was one of the shareholders. He had the responsibility of the daily
H H
management of the pawnshop. While PW1’s brothers live in overseas also
I inherited the shares of the company. PW1 received $25,000 per month I
from the pawnshop on behalf of his brothers.
J J
K 3. The Defendant was the manager of the pawnshop for over 30 K
years. One of his duties :-
L L
M (a) was to handle the safe (he was the only person to have M
the safe’s passcode and keys) which stored the shop’s
N N
cash and pawned properties;
O O
(b) reporting to PW1 of the daily turnover;
P P
Q (c) passing the pawned properties to another staff of the Q
shop for making record and wrapping for storage;
R R
S (d) receiving cash from customers when they redeemed the S
pawned properties;
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
(e) Since 2023, the Defendant was further authorized to
C dispose of the pawned properties by way of reselling C
them when customers failed to redeem within 4 months.
D D
E 4. In late 2022 to mid 2023, the company failed to pay PW1’s E
elder brothers monthly $25,000 entitlement.
F F
G 5. In mid 2023, Mr Chu told PW1 that the Defendant had taken G
cash from the company for running his own business and the Defendant
H H
had failed to pay back.
I I
6. In May 2023, Mr Chu transferred his shares to PW1, soon
J J
afterwards, Mr Chu passed away.
K K
7. PW2 was then appointed as a consultant of the company. His
L L
main duty was to supervise the Defendant.
M M
8. At the meantime, the Defendant promised PW1 to repay the
N N
stolen cash of $3.3 million as soon as possible.
O O
9. On 28 October 2023, the Defendant wrote a confession note
P P
that he had stolen $3.3 million from the company.
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
18 January 2024
C C
10. On 18 January 2024, PW2 found the company had a shortage
D D
of cash. The Defendant admitted to PW2:-
E E
(a) That he had stolen customers’ pawned properties and;
F F
G (b) Took out 121 pawn tickets dated between Oct 2023 to G
January 2024;
H H
I (c) These 121 tickets were issued by 2 other pawn shops; I
J J
(d) All the pawn tickets showed that the properties were
K pawned by Wong Ning-yat. K
L L
11. PW2 also found that the safe was almost empty. 90% of the
M properties were missing. M
N N
12. PW2 then got the keys back from the Defendant and
O dismissed him. O
P P
19 January 2024
Q Q
13. A report was made to the police and the Defendant was
R R
arrested on the same day.
S S
T T
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
14. Investigation revealed that various items as stated in charge 2,
C some have been pawned by WONG Ning-yat (“WONG”) between 2022 to C
2024, while 2 watches and 24 pieces of jewellery could not be recovered.
D D
E 15. The total value of the stolen properties was about $2,150,500 E
in charge 2.
F F
G 16. Under caution, the Defendant said that:- G
H H
(a) WONG had asked him for money to pay for his legal
I fees everyday. As he ran out of money, he took the I
company properties to WONG for him to pawn at
J J
nearby pawn shops for money;
K K
(b) He redeemed the company‘s properties when WONG
L L
repaid him;
M M
(c) He had pawned about 120 items.
N N
O Background O
P P
17. The Defendant is 64 years old with a clear record. In 2023, he
Q had a fight with WONG and ended up with a binding over order for an Q
offence of “fighting in a public place”.
R R
S 18. Before his remand, he lived with his long term girlfriend. S
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
19. During his guilty plea in District Court in July 2025, he was
C remanded in Queen Mary Hospital Custodial Ward due to a surgery of his C
right eye as he has been diagnosed to suffer from serious macular hole in
D D
both eyes.
E E
20. The doctor said that his vision was left with only 20% (right
F F
eye) and 10% (left eye). Although he has an operation on his right eye in
G June 2025, his eye condition has not been improved. Today, I have an G
updated medical report to inform me that the Defendant’s visual acuity is
H H
1/60 his right eye and 0.5/60 left eye. That means he is close to blindness.
I This has a huge negative impact in his daily life. I
J J
21. As to the reasons for him to commit the present offences, he
K said that:- K
L L
(a) In September 2018, WONG approached him and
M offered to sell the Defendant‘s diamond rings M
($800,000) in Dubai for a higher price;
N N
O (b) Given the impression that WONG had apparent O
experience in international luxury goods trading, the
P P
Defendant agreed to the arrangement;
Q Q
(c) When WONG arrived in Dubai, he claimed to be
R R
detained because the diamond was allegedly a
S counterfeit one and he requested $400,000 urgently S
from the Defendant;
T T
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
(d) When WONG claimed to contract middle east
C respiratory syndrome, the Defendant transferred more C
funds as requested by Wong;
D D
E (e) WONG subsequently claimed to own 2 million Bitcoin E
and proposed to sell them to the Defendant, but
F F
required more money from him again. The Defendant
G fell into the trap and provided more money to WONG; G
H H
(f) Over time, WONG continued to prey on the
I Defendant’s naivety who continued to transfer all his I
personal funds ($7 million) to him;
J J
K (g) At the end, the Defendant stole company properties and K
fund to pay WONG, in the hope that WONG would
L L
return the money to him;
M M
(h) The Defendant did not have any personal gain from
N N
committing the present offences.
O O
Sentence
P P
Q 22. The defence accepted that it is a case of breach of trust. Q
R R
23. The Defendant worked in the victim company for 30 years
S and was entrusted with a huge responsibility to take care of all the pawned S
properties and cash in the shop.
T T
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
24. He made used of his position to abuse the trust that the
C company had imposed on him. C
D D
25. In HKSAR v. Ng Kwok Wing 3, the 2nd and the 3rd bands of
E HKSAR v. Cheung Mee Kiu4 has been adjusted :- E
F F
(a) $3 million to 15 million - 5 to 10 years;
G G
(b) $1 million to $3 million - 3 to 5 years.
H H
I 26. The defence also referred to the case of HKSAR v Lee Lai Kit I
Kitty5 that there are a number of factors to be considered in sentencing at
J J
paragraph 23 of the judgement:
K K
“23. …
L (i) the quality and degree of trust reposed in the offender L
including his rank;
(ii) the period over which the fraud or the thefts have been
M M
perpetrated;
(iii) the use to which the money or property dishonestly taken
N was put; N
(iv) the effect upon the victim;
(v) the impact of the offences on the public and public
O confidence; O
(vi) the effect upon fellow-employees or partners;
P (vii) the effect on the offender himself; P
(viii) his own history;
(ix) those matters of mitigation special to himself such as
Q illness; being placed under great strain by excessive Q
responsibility or the like; where, as happens, there has been a
long delay, say over two years, between his being confronted
R R
with his dishonesty by his professional body or the police and
S 3 S
HKSAR v Ng Kwok Wing [2008] 4 HKLRD 1017
4
HKSAR v. Cheung Mee Kiu [2006] 4 HKLRD 776
T T
5
HKSAR v. LEE LAI KIT KITTY CACC 379/2008
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
B the start of his trial; finally, any help given by him to the B
police.”
C C
27. In the present case :-
D D
E (a) The Defendant was entrusted with sole responsibility E
of taking care of the safe which was the place to keep
F F
all the pawned properties by the customers. That means
G the level of trust reposed on the defendant was on the G
highest level, he has full control and custody of all the
H H
pawned properties and cash. The Defendant basically
I had free hand to run the pawn shop and to deal with all I
the cash and pawned items;
J J
K (b) The stolen properties in charge 2 amount to 266 pieces K
of items. Those pawned items have high resell value,
L L
such as Rolex watches and jewellery;
M M
(c) The period of the 2 charges:-
N N
O O
(i) Charge 1 - about 13 months6;
P P
(ii) Charge 2 - about 3.5 months7.
Q Q
R R
S S
6
Between February 2022 and March 2023
T T
7
Between 4th day of October, 2023 and the 16th day of January, 2024 (both dates inclusive)
U U
V V
- 11 -
A A
B B
That means it is not a one off incident, the perpetuated
C offences committed over multiple times for an C
extended period , especially in charge 1.
D D
E (d) Charge 2 was commited after he confessioned to PW1 E
that he had stolen $3.3 million from the company. So,
F F
on one hand he made confession, on the other hand he
G continued to steal, that should be viewed as an G
aggravating factor.
H H
I I
(e) As stated in the summary of facts that in mid 2023, Mr
J Chu told PW1 that the Defendant had taken the J
company cash to run his own business and had failed to
K K
pay back;
L L
(f) From what the defence allegedly said that the defendant
M M
had been fallen into the prey of WONG’s trap since
N 2018. The Defendant kept transferring money to N
WONG and emptied the pawn shop’s safe to pay
O O
WONG. In August 2022, the Defendant realised that he
P had been cheated by WONG together with another P
person and made a report to the police.
Q Q
R (g) However, nothing had stopped him to wake up from R
this perpetrated fraud. The Defendant continued to steal
S S
from the pawnshop even when he realised that the shop
T owner was aware of what he had done with the T
company cash and the pawned items, including the fact
U U
V V
- 12 -
A A
B B
that the Defendant had written a confession note of
C stealing 3.3 million from the company in Oct 2023. C
D D
28. That means the company cash registry had dried up by the
E Defendant thievish acts (bearing in mind the company could not pay E
PW1’s brother’s monthly entitlement of $25,000 since late 2022). The
F F
Defendant then turned to steal from those pawned items.
G G
29. The defence accepted that there was an aggravating factor in
H H
charge 2 as it was committed after he made confession to PW1 of the
I stealing of 3.3 million in charge 2. I
J J
30. The stolen cash in charge 1 is $3.3 million and the value of
K K
the stolen properties in charge 2 was $2.15 million. The total amount of the
L 2 charges is $5,150,500.00. L
M M
31. Taking into account of the above factors, I consider that the
N N
appropriate starting point for each charge is as follow:-
O O
(a) Charge 1 - the starting point is 5 years 8 , given 1/3
P P
discount, the sentence reduces to 40 months.
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
8
60 months
U U
V V
- 13 -
A A
B B
(b) Charge 2 - the starting point is 4 years, enhanced by 3
C months (aggravating factor) 9, given 1/3 discount, the C
sentence is now reduced to 34 months.
D D
E Totality E
F F
32. I order 10 months from charge 2 to run consecutively to
G charge 1. It makes up to a total of 50 months’ imprisonment10. G
H H
Reduction of sentence
I I
33. The prosecution accepted that when the Defendant was
J J
arrested in January 2024, he has been cooperated with the police as this
K case involved a large number of stolen properties (altogether 266 pieces of K
pawned items). Without his co-operation, the investigation conducted by
L L
the police would have been long and tedious. As such, I reduce the sentence
M by 3 months. M
N N
34. I further reduce the sentence by another 3 months in view of
O the health condition of the Defendant. O
P P
11
35. The final sentence comes down to 44 months’ imprisonment .
Q Q
R R
S 9 S
48+3=51 months
10
40 months + 10 months
T T
11
50 months – 3 months – 3 months
U U
V V
- 14 -
A A
B B
36. The Defendant is order to serve a period of 44 months’
C imprisonment for both charges. C
D D
E E
( M Chow )
F Deputy District Judge F
G G
H H
I I
J J
K K
L L
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V