A A
B B
DCCC 1393/2024
C [2025] HKDC 2146 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 1393 OF 2024
F F
G -------------------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
v
I WONG Wing-kit I
---------------------------------------
J J
K Before: Deputy District Judge K K Leung K
Date: 18 December 2025
L L
Present: Ms Herriatta Lai, Public Prosecutor of the Department of
M Justice, for HKSAR M
Mr Andrew C.H.Y. Leung, instructed by Messrs Long An &
N N
Lam LLP, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the
O defendant O
Offence: Causing grievous bodily harm with intent (有意圖而導致身
P P
體受嚴重傷害)
Q Q
R ---------------------------------------- R
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
S S
----------------------------------------
T T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
1. Defendant (“D”) pleaded guilty to an offence of causing
C grievous bodily harm with intent, contrary to section 17(a) of the Offences C
against the Person Ordinance, Cap. 212.
D D
E Summary of Facts E
F F
2. Victim and D were cell mates. They were acquainted since
G they had been remanded in Lai Chi Kok Reception Centre on 11 February G
20231.
H H
I 3. At around 1330 hours on 25 April 2023 at Dayroom E2A of I
Lai Chi Kok Reception Centre (“Offence Location”), D suddenly scolded
J J
the Victim for failing to pay him the cigarettes money. D held a plastic cup
K filled with hot water and poured the same over Victim’s back. D beat the K
Victim up. A Correctional Services Department officer witnessed D
L L
throwing punches at Victim. Victim was separated from D by the officer.
M The Victim was eventually admitted to hospital. M
N N
4. The CCTV captured the following:
O O
(a) D walked past a table and took the cup therefrom;
P P
(b) 8 seconds later, D walked back and had the said cup in
Q his hand and walked towards the Victim; Q
(c) D held the said cup in his right hand and placed his right
R R
hand behind the Victim’s back;
S (d) D then started punching the Victim repeatedly for S
T T
1
In mitigation, information showed that they were acquainted some time in 2022 in
the Reception Centre.
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
around 8 seconds;
C (e) The other people around separated D from the Victim. C
D D
Medical Reports
E E
5. According to the Victim’s 1st medical report dated 14 August
F F
2023 issued by the doctor of Queen Mary Hospital:
G G
(a) Victim was attended to the hospital on 25 April 2023 for
H H
scald injury by hot water.
I (b) On representation, he was found to be suffering from I
partial thickness burn, total body surface area 4% over
J J
anterior chest, 12% over posterior trunk and 1% over
K posterior neck. K
(c) He was resuscitated with intravenous fluid
L L
administration. His wounds were treated conservatively
M with dressing and analgesics. M
(d) His wounds healed uneventfully without any
N N
complications or functional limitations.
O (e) He was last seen well by the doctor at outpatient clinic O
on 25 July 2023.
P P
Q Q
6. According to the Victim’s 2 nd medical report dated 27 March
R R
2024 issued by another doctor, the Victim was admitted to the hospital on
S 25 April 2023 for scald injury by hot water and on presentation, he was S
found to be suffering from second degree burn.
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
Criminal Record and Background of the Defendant
C C
7. D had one previous conviction for trafficking in dangerous
D D
drugs. He was sentence to Training Centre on 3 June 2013.
E E
Mitigation
F F
G 8. D is 27 years old. He is single with no children. He is G
educated to Form 2 level. He earned around HKD 15,000 per month as a
H H
transportation worker. He lives with his parents. His mother is 63 years
I old and works in a packaging factory. His father is 62 years old and works I
as a lorry driver. D has an elder sister who is 31 years old.
J J
K 9. In mitigation, by applying the relevant authority2, Mr Leung K
submitted that:
L L
(a) the degree of pre-meditation was very short and was likely
M M
to be only a few seconds, as D argued with the Victim about
N N
the Victim being unable to pay the cigarette money
O
therefore D responded out of impulse by walking to the O
water dispenser to pour hot water into a cup.
P P
(b) D was furious as he felt cheated and provoked by the
Q Victim at the material time. Q
(c) D was not under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
R R
(d) D acted alone.
S (e) D did not use any weapons other than hot water. S
T T
2
HKSAR v Ma Tik Lun Dicky [2015] 1 HKLRD 380
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
(f) The Victim only suffered scalding injuries and his vital
C signs were stable; there was no evidence that the Victim C
suffered any injuries from being punched by D. The Victim
D D
has received no permanent injuries and his wounds have
E healed uneventfully without complications or functional E
limitations.
F F
(g) The attack was over in around 8 seconds as other inmates
G and prison officers were able to separate them. G
H H
10. It was submitted that the circumstances of this offence are not
I the most serious of its kind. There were very few aggravating factors. I
Victim has now forgiven D and did not wish to proceed with the charge and
J J
did not wish to be a prosecution witness, which is why the Victim is not
K listed as a prosecution witness. Therefore the impact of the assault on the K
Victim has been very little. Mitigation letters from D and the Victim were
L L
submitted.
M M
11. Mr Leung asked the court to adopt a starting point of less than
N N
2 years and 6 months. Mr Leung referred the court to the following cases:
O HKSAR v Mak Hoi Ching also known as Mak Carmen Ka Man and Mak Ka O
Man DCCC 1193/2018 and HKSAR v Tsang Sun Ming DCCC 917/2010.
P P
D was remorseful and has pleaded guilty to save the court’s time. D asked
Q for leniency and promised to control his temper and not to re-offend. Q
R R
Sentence
S S
12. The maximum penalty of the offence of causing grievous
T T
bodily harm with intent is life imprisonment. There is no sentencing tariff
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
for this offence. The Court of Appeal reiterated it is a serious offence which
C warrants a deterrent sentence. The sentences for this offence are very much C
case and fact specific and usual range of sentence is 3 to 12 years’
D D
imprisonment. The major sentencing considerations are (see HKSAR v
E Chan Chun Tat [2013] 6 HKC 225 para 49): E
F F
(1) the extent to which the assault was premeditated;
G (2) the reasons or motivation underlying the assault upon G
the victim;
H H
(3) the mental or emotional state of the assailant at the time
I of the assault; I
(4) whether alcohol or drugs contributed to the actions of
J J
the assailant;
K (5) whether the assault was committed by the assailant K
alone or as part of a group;
L L
(6) the type of weapons employed;
M (7) the level of force or aggression and the persistence with M
which the assault was pressed home;
N N
(8) the injuries caused to the victim; and
O (9) the effect of the assault upon the victim and those close O
to him or her.
P P
Q 13. In HKSAR v Ma Tik Lun Dicky CACC 112/2013: Q
R “41. Furthermore, the aggravating factors for this type of R
wounding case are: (1) the defendant was the principal offender;
(2) the assault was committed in company; (3) the assault was
S S
unprovoked; (4) the assault took place in a public place; (5) the
assault went on after the victim had fallen down; (6) the assault
T went on after the victim became unable to defend himself; (7) the T
victim suffered serious and lasting injuries; (8) at the police
interview, the defendant misled the police as to the facts,
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B indicating a lack of remorse. See paragraph 13 of the Reasons B
for Judgment in HKSAR v Chui Kwok Ming, CACC 380/2013
C (unreported), 27 March 2014.” C
D 14. In the present case, the cause of D’s act arouse from an D
argument with the Victim about payment of the cigarette money. D then,
E E
as put forward by the defence, walked to the water dispenser to pour hot
F water into a plastic cup. D poured it over Victim’s back and threw punches F
on the Victim for almost 8 seconds. I accepted that it was committed by D
G G
alone out of impulse in the heat of argument. However, D used hot water
H to pour on Victim’s back and even further attacked Victim with fists. H
I I
15. Nevertheless, in mitigation, D indicated in his letter that he had
J received professional counselling service to obtain support and found ways J
to control his temper.
K K
L L
16. I have also considered the injuries caused to the Victim and
M
the effect of the assault caused to him. The Victim was 61 at the time of M
the offence. The Victim was scalded with hot water. The medical reports
N N
of the Victim showed he was found to be suffering from second degree
O burn. The surface area of the burn covered over anterior chest (4%), over O
posterior trunk (12%) and over posterior neck (1%). The report also
P P
showed the Victim has received no lasting injuries and his wounds have
Q healed uneventfully without complications or functional limitations. The Q
court was told, the Victim had forgiven D.
R R
S 17. Taking into account of the nature of the offence, the facts of S
the case admitted, the background of D, the mitigation submitted by the
T T
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
defence and the relevant authorities, I adopt a starting point of 24 months’
C (i.e. 2 years’) imprisonment. C
D D
18. I am also aware that, as the facts revealed, D attacked a fellow
E inmate in Lai Chi Kok Reception Centre. The attack in the Reception E
Centre is in itself an aggravating factor. This is accepted by the defence.
F F
In HKSAR v Li Cheng Hong（李承洪） & Ors CACC 408/2010:
G G
“84. Prison is a place to punish convicted people and to allow
H them the opportunity to reform themselves. It is a place where H
order and discipline should and must be obeyed and observed.
I The job of CSD staff will be made very difficult if inmates were I
not deterred from taking part in attacking one another. The judge
J J
was right to say that it was an aggravating factor when the assault
took place inside a prison.
K K
85. A defendant who commits serious acts of violence whilst in
L L
prison must expect an additional sentence.”
M M
19. As such, I enhance the sentence by 3 months i.e. 27 months’
N N
imprisonment. Upon D’s guilty plea, the sentence is 18 months’
O imprisonment. O
P P
20. There is no other mitigating factor which justifies a further
Q reduction of sentence. Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
Conclusion
C C
21. The sentence is 18 months’ imprisonment.
D D
E E
F F
( K K Leung )
G Deputy District Judge 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