A A
B B
DCCC 902/2023
C [2024] HKDC 1878 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 902 OF 2023
F F
G ---------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
v
I LU KWOK LEUNG I
----------------------------
J J
K Before: Deputy District Judge K Lo K
Date: 6 November 2024
L L
Present: Miss Choi Chung Jing Juno, Public Prosecutor, for HKSAR
M Mr Victor Ho, instructed by Ho & Associates, for the M
defendant
N N
Offence: Wounding（傷人）
O O
P
-------------------------------------- P
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
Q Q
--------------------------------------
R R
1. The defendant is convicted on his own plea and agreement to
S S
amended Summary of Facts for a charge of wounding, contrary to section
T 19 of the Offences against the Person Ordinance, Cap 212. T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
Facts
C C
2. At around 1920 hours on 4 November 2023, the defendant and
D D
his friend were having dinner at Mui Che Restaurant in Tuen Mun. There
E was a boiling lamb hotpot on the dining table. The victim (PW1) later E
joined the defendant at the restaurant.
F F
G 3. PW1 and the defendant were ex-lovers. They had a dispute. G
In the heat of argument, the defendant flipped the table at the direction of
H H
PW1. As a result, the hotpot splashed onto PW1. PW1 was sent to the
I hospital. Photos of PW1 as well as the restaurant were taken. I
J J
4. Later, the defendant was arrested for inflicting grievous
K bodily harm. Record of interview was conducted with the defendant. K
Under caution, he said that PW1 grabbed a cup and threw at him, he
L L
became emotional and flipped the table, but he never thought that the lamb
M hotpot would splash onto PW1. He knew he was wrong. M
N N
5. According to the medical report of PW1, PW1’s total body
O surface area of injury was 13%, including superficial burn over left side of O
neck (~3%), left UL (<1%), superficial partial thickness burn with blisters
P P
over right upper chest (~2%), left upper chest and shoulder (~3%), right
Q inner thigh (~2%) and left inner thigh (~2%). She was admitted to hospital Q
on the day of the incident and was discharged on 15 November 2022.
R R
S 6. PW1 was last seen in the plastic surgery outpatient on 14 S
March 2023 and all wounds had healed. There were residual
T T
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
hyperpigmentation over left shoulder and bilateral thighs, as well as
C erythema over the scars. C
D D
Criminal Record
E E
7. The defendant has one previous criminal record involving
F F
conviction in a gambling establishment back in the year 1999, for which
G he was fined $1,000. G
H H
Mitigation
I I
8. The defendant is now aged 47. He is locally born and has
J J
received education up to Form 5. He has been working as a building repair
K technician earning $25,000 per month. He lived separate from his wife and K
son but he supports them.
L L
M 9. Defence counsel tendered to this court mitigation letters from M
the defendant’s aunt, former schoolmates and friends. They described the
N N
defendant as a caring friend and responsible father, kind-hearted with
O gentle personality. They were said to be shocked when they learned of this O
incident and trusted that the defendant’s act was reckless and impulsive.
P P
They believe that the defendant would have deep regret for what he has
Q done. Q
R R
10. Defence counsel submitted that the defendant and PW1 were
S ex-lovers and on the day of incident, PW1 suddenly turned up at the S
defendant’s dinner with his friend, which gave the defendant a shock. They
T T
started quarrelling about their relationship and PW1 suddenly threw a glass
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
directly at the defendant which hit his chest. In response to the provocation,
C the defendant flipped the table out of impulse. It was said that he did not C
foresee the contents of the hotpot would be splashed onto PW1 causing her
D D
injuries. It was also said that PW1 was later convicted upon her own plea
E with common assault for the action. E
F F
11. Defence counsel submitted that the defendant has no triad
G background. He was reckless and he acted on impulse when he committed G
the offence and that the commission of the offence was being provoked by
H H
PW1. It was not an act of revenge. The whole incident was spontaneous
I and was not premeditated. No weapon was used and the defendant had no I
previous criminal record relating to violence.
J J
K 12. It was said also that the defendant was fully co-operative with K
police. He never intended to cause serious injuries to PW1 and he is now
L L
deeply remorseful. He acted out of character and it is highly unlikely that
M he would reoffend. M
N N
13. Defence counsel also referred this court to several cases,
O including HKSAR v Tsang Kin Wing HCMA 319/2013, HKSAR v Yu Yin O
Ming HCMA 492/2009 and HKSAR v Lam Cheuk Kit DCCC 627/2018.
P P
Q 14. Defence accepted that this is a serious case and that immediate Q
custodial sentence is inevitable. On the other hand, he said he was bound
R R
by instructions to ask this court to call for a community service order report
S and he referred this court to the case of HKSAR v Chow Chak Man CACC S
447/1998. He asked this court to impose a lenient sentence on the
T T
defendant.
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
C Discussion C
D D
15. On conviction of this charge upon indictment, a person is
E liable to imprisonment for 3 years. E
F F
16. There is no sentencing tariff for this offence as the facts in
G each case varies. G
H H
17. The injuries suffered by the victim in this case could be
I described as serious. She was hospitalised for 12 days and according to I
the medical report, there was 13% of the total body surface area affected
J J
by superficial burn or superficial partial thickness burn. After her
K discharge, she had to be treated regularly by outpatient treatment. Until 2 K
years after the incident, there were still residual hyperpigmentation over
L L
left shoulder and bilateral thighs, as well as erythema over the scars. For a
M lady in her 30s, this would inevitably lead to loss of confidence or self- M
esteem. This hyperpigmentation and erythema could be visible when one
N N
wear summer dress, shorts or swimsuit. They will also serve as a reminder
O to the traumatic experience. O
P P
18. This court accepts that the defendant committed the offence
Q after he was provoked by the victim who threw a glass at him, and that he Q
acted on impulse. But his act was obviously out of proportion. He might
R R
not have intended but in the least he was reckless. The contents of the
S hotpot would injure the victim. S
T T
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
19. No weapon was used and the defendant acted alone in this
C case. The matter does not relate to triad society. The meeting between the C
defendant and the victim was not prearranged. Rather, it was the victim
D D
who located the defendant and joined him at his dinner. There was
E therefore no premeditation. E
F F
20. Save for a gambling offence, the defendant now aged 47 did
G have a clear record. G
H H
21. Letters from the defendant’s aunt and his friends all support
I the defendant and say that it was totally out of character for the defendant I
that he committed the offence and that the defendant would not reoffend.
J J
They also say the defendant is a gentle and kind person. The defendant in
K his letter says that he is now deeply remorseful as to what he has done and K
vows not to reoffend or act on impulse in the future. This court accepts
L L
that the defendant has learned a lesson and that it is unlikely that he would
M reoffend. M
N N
22. Considering the circumstances of the case, this court finds that
O whilst immediate custodial sentence is the only appropriate sentencing O
option, people must be deterred from resorting to violence even in the face
P P
of provocation, this court however would adopt a sentencing starting point
Q of 6 months’ imprisonment. Q
R R
23. The defendant has pleaded guilty and is therefore entitled to
S full one-third sentencing discount. S
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
24. The defendant is sentenced to 4 months’ imprisonment for the
C present offence. C
D D
E E
( K Lo )
Deputy District Judge
F 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