DCCC407/2023

### 案件基本資料 - 案件名稱：香港特別行政區 訴 羅聰 - 法院：區域法院 (District Court) - 法官：李慶年 - 判決日期：2025年1月24日 ### 案情摘要 被告人（31歲）在小紅書上結識一名13歲學生X，並虛稱自己17歲。被告人以溫習為藉口約X見面，隨後將其帶至油麻地一間酒店。在街道、升降機及酒店房間內，被告人多次在X不情願的情況下對其進行猥褻觸摸，包括觸摸胸部及陰部。X及時求救並報警，最終被告人被裁定三項「猥褻侵犯另一人」罪名成立。 ### 核心法律爭議 本案的核心 legal issue 在於量刑 (sentencing) 的考量。控方主張案件嚴重，涉及對幼童的預謀侵犯；辯方則提出減刑陳詞 (mitigation)，認為年齡差距較小、不涉及違反誠信 (breach of trust)、未使用過度暴力且未發生性交，故嚴重程度較低。 ### 判決理由 法官根據 $ ext{Secretary for Justice v Huang Long Wei}$ 及 $ ext{HKSAR v Tang Kwok Hei}$ 確立的量刑原則，認為成年人猥褻侵犯兒童屬嚴重罪行，量刑必須具備阻嚇性 (deterrence)、反映社會厭惡並為受害者申冤。法官分析認為，儘管被告人未用過度暴力，但其預謀欺騙、無視受害者反抗、觸摸私處以及重犯風險屬「中至中高」且毫無悔意，均屬加重因素。 ### 引用案例與條文 引用 $ ext{Secretary for Justice v Huang Long Wei [2009] 3 HKLRD 130}$ 確立量刑三要素（阻嚇、社會厭惡、申冤）；$ ext{HKSAR v Tang Kwok Hei [2015] 1 HKLRD 792}$ 強調保護易受傷害兒童的必要性；以及 $ ext{HKSAR v Kong Yun Chiu CACC 315/2006}$ 等案例作為量刑參考。 ### 裁決與命令 被告人三項控罪均罪名成立。法官裁定控罪一（12個月監禁）與控罪二（8個月監禁）同期執行，其中8個月與控罪三（18個月監禁）分期執行。總刑期為 26 個月監禁。 ### 判決啟示 本案強調即使在沒有嚴重肉體創傷或未發生性交的情況下，針對幼童的預謀性猥褻行為仍會被視為嚴重罪行。法官特別關注精神科及心理醫生報告中關於重犯風險 (recidivism risk) 的評估，將其作為量刑的重要考量。 --- ### 免責聲明 本摘要由人工智能自動生成，內容可能存在錯誤或遺漏，僅供參考，不構成法律意見。如需法律建議，請諮詢合資格律師。### Case Details - Case Name: HKSAR v Lo Chung - Court: District Court - Judge: Li Hing Nin - Date of Judgment: 24 January 2025 ### Factual Background The defendant (31) met a 13-year-old student (X) via Xiaohongshu, falsely claiming to be 17. Under the pretext of studying, he lured X to a hotel in Yau Ma Tei. The defendant committed three counts of indecent assault by touching X's breasts and private parts in the street, an elevator, and a hotel room, despite X's clear lack of consent and attempts to resist. X managed to seek help and alert the police. ### Key Legal Issues The primary legal issue was the determination of an appropriate sentence. The defense argued for mitigation, citing the lack of breach of trust, absence of extreme violence, and the fact that no sexual intercourse occurred. The court had to balance these against the vulnerability of the victim and the premeditated nature of the crimes. ### Ratio Decidendi The judge applied sentencing principles for indecent assault on children, emphasizing deterrence and public abhorrence. The court found the offense serious due to the defendant's deception, the victim's age, the touching of private parts, and the defendant's lack of remorse. Psychiatric reports indicating a 'moderate to moderate-high' risk of recidivism further influenced the decision to impose a custodial sentence. ### Key Precedents & Statutes Cited $ ext{Secretary for Justice v Huang Long Wei [2009] 3 HKLRD 130}$ for the three pillars of sentencing (deterrence, public abhorrence, and redress); $ ext{HKSAR v Tang Kwok Hei [2015] 1 HKLRD 792}$ regarding the protection of vulnerable children; and $ ext{HKSAR v Kong Yun Chiu CACC 315/2006}$ for comparative sentencing benchmarks. ### Decision & Orders The defendant was convicted on three counts. Count 1 (12 months) and Count 2 (8 months) were ordered to run concurrently, with 8 months of that term to run consecutively with Count 3 (18 months). The total sentence is 26 months' imprisonment. ### Key Takeaways The judgment underscores that premeditated grooming and indecent assault of a minor warrant substantial imprisonment even without physical injury or penetration. It highlights the court's reliance on clinical psychological reports to assess both the victim's trauma and the defendant's risk of re-offending. --- ### Disclaimer This summary is AI-generated and may contain errors or omissions. It is for reference only and does not constitute legal advice. Please consult a qualified lawyer for professional legal advice.