A A
B B
DCCC 550/2025
C [2025] HKDC 2199 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 550 OF 2025
F F
G ---------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
v
I MA ZHIFANG I
----------------------------
J J
K Before: His Honour Judge Tam in Court K
Date: 24 December 2025
L L
Present: Ms Mo Kwok Ping Alison, Public Prosecutor, for HKSAR
M Ms Chun Shuk Kwan Nicole, instructed by Chan & Chan, M
assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant
N N
Offences: [1] – [2] Dealing with property known or believed to represent
O proceeds of an indictable offence (處理已知道或相信為代 O
P
表從可公訴罪行的得益的財產) P
Q Q
---------------------------------------
R REASONS FOR SENTENCE R
---------------------------------------
S S
T T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
1. Ms Ma pleaded guilty before me to two charges of Dealing
C with property known or believed to represent proceeds of an indicatable C
offence, contrary to section 25(1) and (3) of the Organized and Serious
D D
Crimes Ordinance, Cap 455.
E E
2. Particulars are that she, between A and B, both dates inclusive,
F F
in Hong Kong, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe that
G property namely a total sum of C Hong Kong currency in the bank account G
with D, account number E, in whole or in part directly or indirectly
H H
represented any person’s proceeds of an indictable offence, dealt with the
I said property. I
J J
3. For Charge 1, A is 7 May 2024; B is 3 June 2024; C is
K $2,365,289.77; D is Bank of China (Hong Kong) Limited; E is K
01267720510354.
L L
M 4. For Charge 2, A is 7 May 2024; B is 29 June 2024; C is M
$709,253.38; D is Citibank (Hong Kong) Limited; E is 53075765.
N N
O Facts admitted by Ms Ma O
P P
5. Ms Ma was and is a two-way permit holder.
Q Q
6. PW1 fell prey to a WeChat scam whereby he was duped by a
R R
scammer claiming to be a staffer of WeChat and telling PW1 that he needed
S to pay HKD2,000 insurance fee to protect his money in WeChat account. S
PW1 did not want to pay it so the scammer directed him to a website in
T T
order to contact the customer service officer. PW1 did so and was asked
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
by another fraudster to transfer a total sum of HKD399,860 to Ms Ma’s
C bank account with the Bank of China (particulars specified under Charge C
1) before the insurance could be cancelled. After remitting the funds, he
D D
was asked to remit more money. He then realized he was conned so he
E reported the case to the police. E
F F
7. In summary, PW1 remitted a total of HKD399,860 to Ms
G Ma’s Bank of China account on 3 June 2024. G
H H
8. PW2 and PW3 also fell prey to an investment scam whereby
I they were duped by scammers into opening an investment account on some I
bogus cryptocurrency investment platforms. They were asked to remit
J J
funds to various bank accounts one of which was Ms Ma’s bank account
K with Citibank (particulars specified under Charge 2). When they tried but K
failed to recover the sums invested, they realized they were conned so they
L L
reported their cases to the police.
M M
9. In summary, on 6 June 2024, PW2 and PW3 remitted the total
N N
sums of HKD695,000 and HKD10,000 respectively to Ms Ma’s Citibank
O account. O
P P
The Bank of China account
Q Q
10. The Bank of China account was opened by Ms Ma in person
R R
on 6 May 2024. She was the sole signatory. Fund flow analysis showed
S between 7 May and 3 June 2024, the account recorded a total deposit of S
HKD2,365,289.77 (including the said sum of HKD399,860 from PW1)
T T
over 19 transactions and a total withdrawal of HKD2,364,144.47 on 27
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
occasions.
C C
11. On the account opening mandate, Ms Ma claimed to be a
D D
manager, making CNY25,000-50,000 per month; she provided a
E correspondence address in Shenzhen. She submitted her China ID card E
and two way permit copies during the opening process. She provided an
F F
email address and a mobile number. Ms Ma was provided with an ATM
G card, online banking service and bank statements by the bank. G
H H
12. On 2 October 2024, Ms Ma was arrested on entering Hong
I Kong. I
J J
Citibank account
K K
13. The Citibank account was opened by Ms Ma in person on 7
L L
May 2024. She was the sole signatory. Fund flow analysis showed
M between 7 May and 29 June 2024, the account recorded a total deposit of M
HKD709,253.38 (including the said sums from PW2 & PW3 amounting to
N N
HKD709,000) over 33 transactions, and a total withdrawal of
O HKD708,776.14 on 36 occasions. Fund flow analysis also showed that the O
Citibank account had at least three transactions with Ms Ma’s other bank
P P
account(s) including a Hang Seng Bank account.
Q Q
14. On the account opening mandate, Ms Ma reported to be a
R R
manager, earning HKD34,000 per month and she provided a
S correspondence address in Shenzhen. She submitted her China ID card S
and two way permit copies during the opening process. She provided a
T T
similar email address and the same mobile number. Ms Ma applied for
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
online banking and she was provided with bank statements by the bank.
C C
15. On 8 October 2024, Ms Ma was arrested at the Tai Lam
D D
Centre for Women.
E E
16. Analysis of both the Bank of China account and the Citibank
F F
account showed that soon after the funds were remitted into the accounts,
G they were siphoned off within the same day, leaving behind a low daily G
balance. Hallmark of money laundering was sighted and each of the two
H H
accounts was used as a temporary repository of funds.
I I
17. Ms Ma now admits she was always in control of the two
J J
subject accounts and that she dealt with the funds in those accounts.
K K
Criminal record
L L
M 18. Ms Ma has a clear record in Hong Kong. M
N N
Antecedents
O O
19. Ms Ma is aged 53 (52 at the time of the offences), educated to
P P
secondary school level in Mainland, was a cleaner at the time of arrest. Ms
Q Ma is married and was living in Shenzhen. Q
R R
Mitigation
S S
20. Ms Nicole Chun of counsel assigned by the Director of Legal
T T
Aid mitigated on behalf of Ms Ma. The following is a summary of the
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
mitigation submissions.
C C
21. Ms Ma has a clear record in Hong Kong and Mainland.
D D
E 22. Ms Ma was born in Shaanxi. She underwent a major E
operation in 2023. She also experiences chronic stomach pain and
F F
gallstones.
G G
23. Ms Ma separated from her husband in 2018. Since then, Ms
H H
Ma has been the sole caregiver for their two children (21 and 15, both
I studying) and the sole breadwinner of the family. Ms Ma also supports her I
elderly parents financially.
J J
K 24. Prior to arrest, Ms Ma worked as a casual cleaner, earning K
around RMB3,000 per month.
L L
M 25. Ms Ma committed the present offences for a reward of M
RMB1,000. Ms Ma had reasonable grounds to believe the monies in the
N N
accounts represented proceeds of offences. There is no evidence she knew
O of the predicate offences nor any of the victims. The sums involved were O
not exceptionally large; the duration of the offences was approximately two
P P
months.
Q Q
26. During detention since her first arrest, Ms Ma has reflected on
R R
her wrongdoing. She deeply regrets her actions. She feels ashamed and
S remorseful, and wishes to apologize to all the victims. She pledges to S
reform and to refrain from future criminal conduct.
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
27. Ms Ma’s strongest plea for leniency rests on her early guilty
C plea. C
D D
28. Ms Chun asked for a lenient sentence for Ms Ma so that the
E latter may return home as soon as possible. E
F F
29. There is no fixed sentencing tariff for money laundering
G offences, as each case depends on its own facts. The relevant sentencing G
principles are laid down in:
H H
I (a) HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] 5 HKLRD 545; I
J J
(b) HKSAR v Boma Amaso [2012] 2 HKLRD 33; and
K K
(c) HKSAR v Lam Hing Wan [2018] HKCA 686, CACC
L L
387/2016, at para 30.
M M
30. In respect of the request by the prosecution for enhancement
N N
of sentence under OSCO, Ms Chun raises no objection.
O O
31. However, on the subject of extent of enhancement, Ms Chun
P P
submits that while the harm caused to the community by money laundering
Q offence is still substantial, Table B (pp 6-7 of CIP Li’s statement) shows a Q
sharp downward trend from 2022 to 2025 (up to September) in:
R R
S (a) The number and amount of “ML cases” (item (2)); S
T T
(b) The number and amount of “Deception and ML cases”
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
(item (3)); and
C C
(c) The number, amount, and proportion of “Cases with
D D
Stooge Account(s)” (item (4)).
E E
32. In HKSAR v Leung Yiu Fai CACC 100/2014, the Court of
F F
Appeal stated at para 56 that sentence enhancement under section 27(11)
G of OSCO should be determined by the judge at his discretion based on the G
specific circumstances of each case.
H H
I 33. In HKSAR v Fong Chi Yam [2019] HKCA 121, CACC I
411/2017, the Court of Appeal held that (additional) punishment should
J J
not be imposed for offences in which the defendant had neither knowledge
K nor participation. There, the sentence enhancement under OSCO due to K
prevalence of deception cases was found to be erroneous and was set aside.
L L
M 34. Here, there is no evidence that Ms Ma had knowledge of or M
participated in the predicate deceptions. Ms Chun invited the court to
N N
consider the statistics of “ML cases” and “Stooge”, but not “Deception
O cases” in CIP Li’s statement. O
P P
35. Ms Chun draws the court’s attention to the overlapping
Q periods of the two offences and urges the court to apply the totality Q
principle and order the sentences to run concurrently.
R R
S 36. Ms Chun submitted on behalf of Ms Ma one mitigation letter S
written by Ms Ma herself in Chinese. The contents generally are that Ms
T T
Ma has reflected upon her mistakes; that she is very remorseful and
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
apologizes to the Hong Kong public; that she will not re-offend; that she
C will on release tell his relatives and friends not to lend bank accounts to C
others. Ms Ma asked the court for a chance to reform and a lenient sentence
D D
so she may re-unite with her family earlier.
E E
37. Upon enquiry by the court, Ms Chun after taking instructions
F F
submitted that Ms Ma did make the false representation in the account
G opening mandates about her job and income. G
H H
Sentence
I I
38. Money laundering is a serious offence. A deterrent sentence
J J
is always called for.
K K
39. The case has the following features. Charge 1 involves about
L L
HK$2.4 million laundered within just under one month. Charge 2 involves
M about HK$700,000 laundered within just over 7 weeks. There were 19 M
deposits and 27 withdrawals under Charge 1. There were 33 deposits and
N N
36 withdrawals under Charge 2. Ms Ma not only opened the bank accounts
O for the purpose of money laundering, she actually dealt with the funds O
herself. Ms Ma exercised deceit on the banks when she represented herself
P P
to be a manager earning a substantial monthly salary at the time of account
Q opening. Ms Ma admitted in mitigation that she received a reward of Q
RMB1,000 for her labour.
R R
S 40. There is no evidence of international dimension. There is no S
evidence of knowledge on the part of Ms Ma of the nature of the predicate
T T
offences of deception.
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
B B
C 41. From what the prosecution told me about Ms Ma’s travel C
records, I formed the view that Ms Ma came to Hong Kong on 6 and 7 May
D D
2024 specifically to open the two subject accounts. This is an aggravating
E factor. E
F F
42. I bear in mind para 15 of HKSAR v Wan Kwok Keung [2012]
G 1 HKLRD 201 when determining the appropriate starting points of G
sentence for Ms Ma.
H H
I 43. For Charge 1, I adopt a starting point of 3 ½ years’ I
imprisonment. For Charge 2, I adopt a starting point of 2 years 9 months’
J J
imprisonment.
K K
44. Ms Ma pleaded guilty in good time earning for herself the full
L L
1/3 sentencing discount. There are no other mitigating factors of weight to
M justify another sentence reduction. M
N N
45. Prosecution sought to furnish a witness statement of CIP Li
O Yiu Nam dated 31 October 2025 under section 27(2) of OSCO, Cap 455, O
with a view to requesting sentence enhancement. With the information in
P P
the statement, prosecution sought to show (a) the prevalence of money
Q laundering offence and; (b) the nature and extent of any harm, whether Q
direct or indirect, caused to the community by recent occurrences of money
R R
laundering offence.
S S
46. Ms Chun did not object to the reception of the statement. I
T T
therefore received the statement.
U U
V V
- 11 -
A A
B B
C 47. The case of Fong Chi Yam relied on by Ms Chun does not C
assist Ms Ma. In Fong, although the applicant was charged with and
D D
convicted of two charges of money laundering, the basis upon which the
E enhancement of sentence was made was prevalence of “telephone E
deception” (see para 93 of the Reasons for Judgment). Here, in Ms Ma’s
F F
case, the basis is completely different: enhancement of sentence is sought
G on the basis of prevalence of money laundering offence, and the harm G
caused to the community by recent occurrences of money laundering
H H
offence.
I I
48. From Table A on page 5 of CIP Li’s statement, it can be seen
J J
that the total number of stooges (ie those who opened stooge account(s))
K arrested for the whole of 2025 (projected figure) would be 5,538 as K
compared to the figure of 7,883 for 2024. This represented a drop of 30%.
L L
Although a dropped figure, it still is a substantial number as compared with
M the previous years: 6,485 for year 2023, 3,708 for year 2022, 2,220 for year M
2021, and 760 for year 2020.
N N
O 49. I am satisfied that the use of stooge accounts, and by O
implication the occurrence of money laundering offences, is still prevalent.
P P
Q 50. From Table B on pages 6 and 7 of CIP Li’s statement, it can Q
be seen, where there was use of local stooge accounts, that the amount of
R R
reported losses (both local and overseas) and/or proceeds laundered locally
S for the whole of 2025 (projected figure) would be 1,208.65M. The S
corresponding number of cases (projected figure) would be 1,226. The
T T
amount figure represented a drop of 73% from the year 2024 (4,466.39M).
U U
V V
- 12 -
A A
B B
The case number figure represented a drop of 66.6% from the year 2024
C (3,675). The decrease could not be said to be insignificant. C
D D
51. However, the relevant amount and the number of cases are not
E the only yardsticks with which to measure the harm caused to the E
community.
F F
G 52. CIP Li in para 18 of his statement (pages 5 and 6) laid out how G
the anti-money laundering regime in Hong Kong is hampered by the
H H
prevalence of stooge accounts as follows:
I I
(a) It interferes with the normal operation of the banking
J J
system, having a negative effect on the reputation of
K Hong Kong as a well-known international financial hub; K
L L
(b) It forms multiple layers of “shields” concealing the
M identity of the masterminds behind, making it difficult, M
if not impossible, for police to identify the masterminds
N N
behind;
O O
(c) It substantially facilitates the commission of crimes and
P P
in turn leads to more crimes being committed, as the
Q mastermind could easily get away from their criminal Q
liability;
R R
S (d) It makes money laundering easier, which allows S
culprits to make use of their ill-gotten gains to extend
T T
their sphere to engage in a wider range of illegal
U U
V V
- 13 -
A A
B B
activities;
C C
(e) It means that law enforcement agencies have to put in
D D
more investigation efforts and resources; and
E E
(f) People with low income or less awareness of the
F F
consequences of selling their bank accounts are more
G likely to be lured by the culprits to take the risks of G
commission of crimes to surrender their accounts for
H H
monetary reward.
I I
53. I am satisfied that the nature and extent of harm, whether
J J
direct or indirect, caused to the community, by recent occurrences of
K money laundering offence is still substantial. K
L L
54. I am therefore empowered by section 27(11) of OSCO, Cap
M 455, to enhance the sentences of Ms Ma. Given the trend of the statistics, M
I am of the view that an enhancement of 20% is sufficient in all the
N N
circumstances. I will ignore decimal places in the final calculation of the
O sentences in terms of months. O
P P
55. Although I recognize an overlapping period between the two
Q offences, one cannot deny that they were separate offences relating to Q
different bank accounts. However, I will allow a certain degree of
R R
concurrency in the sentences on application of the totality principle.
S S
56. I will pass individual enhanced sentences for the two charges
T T
and make an appropriate order to arrive at a final aggregate sentence for
U U
V V
- 14 -
A A
B B
Ms Ma.
C C
(Ms Ma, please stand)
D D
E 57. For Charge 1, the sentence is 33 months’ imprisonment. E
F F
58. For Charge 2, the sentence is 26 months’ imprisonment.
G G
59. I order that 7 months of the sentence on Charge 2 do run
H H
consecutively to the sentence on Charge 1, making an aggregate sentence
I for Ms Ma of 40 months’ imprisonment. I
J J
K K
( Isaac Tam )
L District Judge 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 550/2025
C [2025] HKDC 2199 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 550 OF 2025
F F
G ---------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
v
I MA ZHIFANG I
----------------------------
J J
K Before: His Honour Judge Tam in Court K
Date: 24 December 2025
L L
Present: Ms Mo Kwok Ping Alison, Public Prosecutor, for HKSAR
M Ms Chun Shuk Kwan Nicole, instructed by Chan & Chan, M
assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant
N N
Offences: [1] – [2] Dealing with property known or believed to represent
O proceeds of an indictable offence (處理已知道或相信為代 O
P
表從可公訴罪行的得益的財產) P
Q Q
---------------------------------------
R REASONS FOR SENTENCE R
---------------------------------------
S S
T T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
1. Ms Ma pleaded guilty before me to two charges of Dealing
C with property known or believed to represent proceeds of an indicatable C
offence, contrary to section 25(1) and (3) of the Organized and Serious
D D
Crimes Ordinance, Cap 455.
E E
2. Particulars are that she, between A and B, both dates inclusive,
F F
in Hong Kong, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe that
G property namely a total sum of C Hong Kong currency in the bank account G
with D, account number E, in whole or in part directly or indirectly
H H
represented any person’s proceeds of an indictable offence, dealt with the
I said property. I
J J
3. For Charge 1, A is 7 May 2024; B is 3 June 2024; C is
K $2,365,289.77; D is Bank of China (Hong Kong) Limited; E is K
01267720510354.
L L
M 4. For Charge 2, A is 7 May 2024; B is 29 June 2024; C is M
$709,253.38; D is Citibank (Hong Kong) Limited; E is 53075765.
N N
O Facts admitted by Ms Ma O
P P
5. Ms Ma was and is a two-way permit holder.
Q Q
6. PW1 fell prey to a WeChat scam whereby he was duped by a
R R
scammer claiming to be a staffer of WeChat and telling PW1 that he needed
S to pay HKD2,000 insurance fee to protect his money in WeChat account. S
PW1 did not want to pay it so the scammer directed him to a website in
T T
order to contact the customer service officer. PW1 did so and was asked
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
by another fraudster to transfer a total sum of HKD399,860 to Ms Ma’s
C bank account with the Bank of China (particulars specified under Charge C
1) before the insurance could be cancelled. After remitting the funds, he
D D
was asked to remit more money. He then realized he was conned so he
E reported the case to the police. E
F F
7. In summary, PW1 remitted a total of HKD399,860 to Ms
G Ma’s Bank of China account on 3 June 2024. G
H H
8. PW2 and PW3 also fell prey to an investment scam whereby
I they were duped by scammers into opening an investment account on some I
bogus cryptocurrency investment platforms. They were asked to remit
J J
funds to various bank accounts one of which was Ms Ma’s bank account
K with Citibank (particulars specified under Charge 2). When they tried but K
failed to recover the sums invested, they realized they were conned so they
L L
reported their cases to the police.
M M
9. In summary, on 6 June 2024, PW2 and PW3 remitted the total
N N
sums of HKD695,000 and HKD10,000 respectively to Ms Ma’s Citibank
O account. O
P P
The Bank of China account
Q Q
10. The Bank of China account was opened by Ms Ma in person
R R
on 6 May 2024. She was the sole signatory. Fund flow analysis showed
S between 7 May and 3 June 2024, the account recorded a total deposit of S
HKD2,365,289.77 (including the said sum of HKD399,860 from PW1)
T T
over 19 transactions and a total withdrawal of HKD2,364,144.47 on 27
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
occasions.
C C
11. On the account opening mandate, Ms Ma claimed to be a
D D
manager, making CNY25,000-50,000 per month; she provided a
E correspondence address in Shenzhen. She submitted her China ID card E
and two way permit copies during the opening process. She provided an
F F
email address and a mobile number. Ms Ma was provided with an ATM
G card, online banking service and bank statements by the bank. G
H H
12. On 2 October 2024, Ms Ma was arrested on entering Hong
I Kong. I
J J
Citibank account
K K
13. The Citibank account was opened by Ms Ma in person on 7
L L
May 2024. She was the sole signatory. Fund flow analysis showed
M between 7 May and 29 June 2024, the account recorded a total deposit of M
HKD709,253.38 (including the said sums from PW2 & PW3 amounting to
N N
HKD709,000) over 33 transactions, and a total withdrawal of
O HKD708,776.14 on 36 occasions. Fund flow analysis also showed that the O
Citibank account had at least three transactions with Ms Ma’s other bank
P P
account(s) including a Hang Seng Bank account.
Q Q
14. On the account opening mandate, Ms Ma reported to be a
R R
manager, earning HKD34,000 per month and she provided a
S correspondence address in Shenzhen. She submitted her China ID card S
and two way permit copies during the opening process. She provided a
T T
similar email address and the same mobile number. Ms Ma applied for
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
online banking and she was provided with bank statements by the bank.
C C
15. On 8 October 2024, Ms Ma was arrested at the Tai Lam
D D
Centre for Women.
E E
16. Analysis of both the Bank of China account and the Citibank
F F
account showed that soon after the funds were remitted into the accounts,
G they were siphoned off within the same day, leaving behind a low daily G
balance. Hallmark of money laundering was sighted and each of the two
H H
accounts was used as a temporary repository of funds.
I I
17. Ms Ma now admits she was always in control of the two
J J
subject accounts and that she dealt with the funds in those accounts.
K K
Criminal record
L L
M 18. Ms Ma has a clear record in Hong Kong. M
N N
Antecedents
O O
19. Ms Ma is aged 53 (52 at the time of the offences), educated to
P P
secondary school level in Mainland, was a cleaner at the time of arrest. Ms
Q Ma is married and was living in Shenzhen. Q
R R
Mitigation
S S
20. Ms Nicole Chun of counsel assigned by the Director of Legal
T T
Aid mitigated on behalf of Ms Ma. The following is a summary of the
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
mitigation submissions.
C C
21. Ms Ma has a clear record in Hong Kong and Mainland.
D D
E 22. Ms Ma was born in Shaanxi. She underwent a major E
operation in 2023. She also experiences chronic stomach pain and
F F
gallstones.
G G
23. Ms Ma separated from her husband in 2018. Since then, Ms
H H
Ma has been the sole caregiver for their two children (21 and 15, both
I studying) and the sole breadwinner of the family. Ms Ma also supports her I
elderly parents financially.
J J
K 24. Prior to arrest, Ms Ma worked as a casual cleaner, earning K
around RMB3,000 per month.
L L
M 25. Ms Ma committed the present offences for a reward of M
RMB1,000. Ms Ma had reasonable grounds to believe the monies in the
N N
accounts represented proceeds of offences. There is no evidence she knew
O of the predicate offences nor any of the victims. The sums involved were O
not exceptionally large; the duration of the offences was approximately two
P P
months.
Q Q
26. During detention since her first arrest, Ms Ma has reflected on
R R
her wrongdoing. She deeply regrets her actions. She feels ashamed and
S remorseful, and wishes to apologize to all the victims. She pledges to S
reform and to refrain from future criminal conduct.
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
27. Ms Ma’s strongest plea for leniency rests on her early guilty
C plea. C
D D
28. Ms Chun asked for a lenient sentence for Ms Ma so that the
E latter may return home as soon as possible. E
F F
29. There is no fixed sentencing tariff for money laundering
G offences, as each case depends on its own facts. The relevant sentencing G
principles are laid down in:
H H
I (a) HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] 5 HKLRD 545; I
J J
(b) HKSAR v Boma Amaso [2012] 2 HKLRD 33; and
K K
(c) HKSAR v Lam Hing Wan [2018] HKCA 686, CACC
L L
387/2016, at para 30.
M M
30. In respect of the request by the prosecution for enhancement
N N
of sentence under OSCO, Ms Chun raises no objection.
O O
31. However, on the subject of extent of enhancement, Ms Chun
P P
submits that while the harm caused to the community by money laundering
Q offence is still substantial, Table B (pp 6-7 of CIP Li’s statement) shows a Q
sharp downward trend from 2022 to 2025 (up to September) in:
R R
S (a) The number and amount of “ML cases” (item (2)); S
T T
(b) The number and amount of “Deception and ML cases”
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
(item (3)); and
C C
(c) The number, amount, and proportion of “Cases with
D D
Stooge Account(s)” (item (4)).
E E
32. In HKSAR v Leung Yiu Fai CACC 100/2014, the Court of
F F
Appeal stated at para 56 that sentence enhancement under section 27(11)
G of OSCO should be determined by the judge at his discretion based on the G
specific circumstances of each case.
H H
I 33. In HKSAR v Fong Chi Yam [2019] HKCA 121, CACC I
411/2017, the Court of Appeal held that (additional) punishment should
J J
not be imposed for offences in which the defendant had neither knowledge
K nor participation. There, the sentence enhancement under OSCO due to K
prevalence of deception cases was found to be erroneous and was set aside.
L L
M 34. Here, there is no evidence that Ms Ma had knowledge of or M
participated in the predicate deceptions. Ms Chun invited the court to
N N
consider the statistics of “ML cases” and “Stooge”, but not “Deception
O cases” in CIP Li’s statement. O
P P
35. Ms Chun draws the court’s attention to the overlapping
Q periods of the two offences and urges the court to apply the totality Q
principle and order the sentences to run concurrently.
R R
S 36. Ms Chun submitted on behalf of Ms Ma one mitigation letter S
written by Ms Ma herself in Chinese. The contents generally are that Ms
T T
Ma has reflected upon her mistakes; that she is very remorseful and
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
apologizes to the Hong Kong public; that she will not re-offend; that she
C will on release tell his relatives and friends not to lend bank accounts to C
others. Ms Ma asked the court for a chance to reform and a lenient sentence
D D
so she may re-unite with her family earlier.
E E
37. Upon enquiry by the court, Ms Chun after taking instructions
F F
submitted that Ms Ma did make the false representation in the account
G opening mandates about her job and income. G
H H
Sentence
I I
38. Money laundering is a serious offence. A deterrent sentence
J J
is always called for.
K K
39. The case has the following features. Charge 1 involves about
L L
HK$2.4 million laundered within just under one month. Charge 2 involves
M about HK$700,000 laundered within just over 7 weeks. There were 19 M
deposits and 27 withdrawals under Charge 1. There were 33 deposits and
N N
36 withdrawals under Charge 2. Ms Ma not only opened the bank accounts
O for the purpose of money laundering, she actually dealt with the funds O
herself. Ms Ma exercised deceit on the banks when she represented herself
P P
to be a manager earning a substantial monthly salary at the time of account
Q opening. Ms Ma admitted in mitigation that she received a reward of Q
RMB1,000 for her labour.
R R
S 40. There is no evidence of international dimension. There is no S
evidence of knowledge on the part of Ms Ma of the nature of the predicate
T T
offences of deception.
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
B B
C 41. From what the prosecution told me about Ms Ma’s travel C
records, I formed the view that Ms Ma came to Hong Kong on 6 and 7 May
D D
2024 specifically to open the two subject accounts. This is an aggravating
E factor. E
F F
42. I bear in mind para 15 of HKSAR v Wan Kwok Keung [2012]
G 1 HKLRD 201 when determining the appropriate starting points of G
sentence for Ms Ma.
H H
I 43. For Charge 1, I adopt a starting point of 3 ½ years’ I
imprisonment. For Charge 2, I adopt a starting point of 2 years 9 months’
J J
imprisonment.
K K
44. Ms Ma pleaded guilty in good time earning for herself the full
L L
1/3 sentencing discount. There are no other mitigating factors of weight to
M justify another sentence reduction. M
N N
45. Prosecution sought to furnish a witness statement of CIP Li
O Yiu Nam dated 31 October 2025 under section 27(2) of OSCO, Cap 455, O
with a view to requesting sentence enhancement. With the information in
P P
the statement, prosecution sought to show (a) the prevalence of money
Q laundering offence and; (b) the nature and extent of any harm, whether Q
direct or indirect, caused to the community by recent occurrences of money
R R
laundering offence.
S S
46. Ms Chun did not object to the reception of the statement. I
T T
therefore received the statement.
U U
V V
- 11 -
A A
B B
C 47. The case of Fong Chi Yam relied on by Ms Chun does not C
assist Ms Ma. In Fong, although the applicant was charged with and
D D
convicted of two charges of money laundering, the basis upon which the
E enhancement of sentence was made was prevalence of “telephone E
deception” (see para 93 of the Reasons for Judgment). Here, in Ms Ma’s
F F
case, the basis is completely different: enhancement of sentence is sought
G on the basis of prevalence of money laundering offence, and the harm G
caused to the community by recent occurrences of money laundering
H H
offence.
I I
48. From Table A on page 5 of CIP Li’s statement, it can be seen
J J
that the total number of stooges (ie those who opened stooge account(s))
K arrested for the whole of 2025 (projected figure) would be 5,538 as K
compared to the figure of 7,883 for 2024. This represented a drop of 30%.
L L
Although a dropped figure, it still is a substantial number as compared with
M the previous years: 6,485 for year 2023, 3,708 for year 2022, 2,220 for year M
2021, and 760 for year 2020.
N N
O 49. I am satisfied that the use of stooge accounts, and by O
implication the occurrence of money laundering offences, is still prevalent.
P P
Q 50. From Table B on pages 6 and 7 of CIP Li’s statement, it can Q
be seen, where there was use of local stooge accounts, that the amount of
R R
reported losses (both local and overseas) and/or proceeds laundered locally
S for the whole of 2025 (projected figure) would be 1,208.65M. The S
corresponding number of cases (projected figure) would be 1,226. The
T T
amount figure represented a drop of 73% from the year 2024 (4,466.39M).
U U
V V
- 12 -
A A
B B
The case number figure represented a drop of 66.6% from the year 2024
C (3,675). The decrease could not be said to be insignificant. C
D D
51. However, the relevant amount and the number of cases are not
E the only yardsticks with which to measure the harm caused to the E
community.
F F
G 52. CIP Li in para 18 of his statement (pages 5 and 6) laid out how G
the anti-money laundering regime in Hong Kong is hampered by the
H H
prevalence of stooge accounts as follows:
I I
(a) It interferes with the normal operation of the banking
J J
system, having a negative effect on the reputation of
K Hong Kong as a well-known international financial hub; K
L L
(b) It forms multiple layers of “shields” concealing the
M identity of the masterminds behind, making it difficult, M
if not impossible, for police to identify the masterminds
N N
behind;
O O
(c) It substantially facilitates the commission of crimes and
P P
in turn leads to more crimes being committed, as the
Q mastermind could easily get away from their criminal Q
liability;
R R
S (d) It makes money laundering easier, which allows S
culprits to make use of their ill-gotten gains to extend
T T
their sphere to engage in a wider range of illegal
U U
V V
- 13 -
A A
B B
activities;
C C
(e) It means that law enforcement agencies have to put in
D D
more investigation efforts and resources; and
E E
(f) People with low income or less awareness of the
F F
consequences of selling their bank accounts are more
G likely to be lured by the culprits to take the risks of G
commission of crimes to surrender their accounts for
H H
monetary reward.
I I
53. I am satisfied that the nature and extent of harm, whether
J J
direct or indirect, caused to the community, by recent occurrences of
K money laundering offence is still substantial. K
L L
54. I am therefore empowered by section 27(11) of OSCO, Cap
M 455, to enhance the sentences of Ms Ma. Given the trend of the statistics, M
I am of the view that an enhancement of 20% is sufficient in all the
N N
circumstances. I will ignore decimal places in the final calculation of the
O sentences in terms of months. O
P P
55. Although I recognize an overlapping period between the two
Q offences, one cannot deny that they were separate offences relating to Q
different bank accounts. However, I will allow a certain degree of
R R
concurrency in the sentences on application of the totality principle.
S S
56. I will pass individual enhanced sentences for the two charges
T T
and make an appropriate order to arrive at a final aggregate sentence for
U U
V V
- 14 -
A A
B B
Ms Ma.
C C
(Ms Ma, please stand)
D D
E 57. For Charge 1, the sentence is 33 months’ imprisonment. E
F F
58. For Charge 2, the sentence is 26 months’ imprisonment.
G G
59. I order that 7 months of the sentence on Charge 2 do run
H H
consecutively to the sentence on Charge 1, making an aggregate sentence
I for Ms Ma of 40 months’ imprisonment. I
J J
K K
( Isaac Tam )
L District Judge L
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V