區域法院（刑事）Deputy District Judge Colin Wong8/1/2026[2026] HKDC 61
DCCC1405/2024
A A
DCCC 1405/2024
B B
[2026] HKDC 61
C C
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
D D
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
E CRIMINAL CASE NO 1405 OF 2024 E
F F
------------------------------------------
G HKSAR G
V
H H
LI LEUNG FUNG
I I
------------------------------------------
J J
Before: Deputy District Judge Colin Wong
K K
Date: 9 January 2026
L
Present: Mr Lo Paulinus, Counsel-on-Fiat for HKSAR/Director of L
Public Prosecutions
M M
Mr Keung Ho, Karl, instructed by Dominic Y. K. Lai & Co.,
N for the defendant N
Offence: Theft（盜竊罪）
O O
P ----------------------------------------- P
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
Q Q
-----------------------------------------
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
1. The Defendant pleaded guilty to one count of theft1, that he
B B
stole choses in action totaling HK$3,195,090, debts owed by Hang Seng
C Bank to Madam Tsang Wai Fong. C
D D
Facts
E E
2. The Defendant has known the victim, Madam Tsang, for
F F
approximately 25 years, having been classmates during their secondary
G education and were courting until the Defendant went abroad to pursue G
further studies. They were out of contact for nearly 20 years until 2023.
H H
I I
3. Due to Madam Tsang’s strained relationship with her family,
J
she entrusted the Defendant with the management of her assets, which J
included the sale of her residential flat located at Yuen Long On Ning Road,
K K
Yuen Long, New Territories (the “Flat”), in Hong Kong prior to her
L
emigrating to Japan in April 2023. L
M M
4. The Flat was ultimately sold in June 2023 with the proceeds
N of HK$3,163,286.10, which was subsequently deposited into the Hang N
Seng Bank account (the “HSB Account”) held by Madam Tsang.
O O
P 5. On 18 March 2024, Madam Tsang received WhatsApp P
messages from the Defendant, stating that he would be leaving Hong Kong
Q Q
for a year and had utilized some money from her HSB Account.
R R
S S
T T
1
Contrary to section 9 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap 210
U U
V V
-3-
A A
6. The report detailing the history of the HSB Account for the
B B
period from 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024 (both dates inclusive) revealed,
C inter alia, the following: C
D D
(i) On 21 September 2023, a deposit of HK$3,163,286.10
E was made into the HSB Account; and E
F F
(ii) A total of 132 ATM withdrawals, amounting to
G HK$3,195,090, were made between 22 September G
2023 and 17 January 2024 (both dates inclusive).
H H
I I
7. In the WhatsApp Messages between Madam Tsang and the
J
Defendant, when Madam Tsang inquired about the status of her funds, the J
Defendant replied that it would take some time to reimburse Madam Tsang
K K
and acknowledged that it was his fault.
L L
8. On 22 April 2024 (“the Date of Arrest”) at 1:30 pm, the
M M
Defendant was arrested by DPC15643 (“PW1”) for “Theft”. Under caution
N at the scene, the Defendant said “Without asking her, I stole the money N
from her account and used it”.
O O
P 9. In a video-recorded interview conducted from 11:17 pm to P
11:51 pm on the Date of Arrest, the Defendant admitted the offence, and
Q Q
stated that he spent all the stolen money on gambling and repaying his debts.
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
Mitigation
B B
C 10. The Defendant is now 46 years old. He was born in mainland C
China and came to Hong Kong in 1981. He has been educated up to
D D
Secondary 5. He is married, with three sons, aged 24, 22 and 18
E respectively. All are still in full-time education. His second son suffers E
from severe congenital intellectual disability and physical impairment, is
F F
unable to care for himself and requires constant supervision. The
G Defendant had been the sole breadwinner for the family. Before his arrest, G
he worked for many years in the construction industry and at the time of
H H
the offence, he was employed as a foreman, earning about HK$23,500 per
I I
month. After his remand, his wife had to seek employment, while his nearly
J
70 year-old mother now helps care for the disable son. J
K K
11. These are the mitigating factors submitted:
L L
(i) the Defendant pleaded guilty in the first available
M M
opportunity;
N N
(ii) the Defendant has shown remorse by making frank
O O
admission first to Madam Tsang and later to the Police;
P P
(iii) the Defendant committed the present offence out of
Q Q
desperation, as he needed money to repay the various
R debts he owed; R
S S
(iv) the breach of trust is that of between friends, not the
T worst of its kind, as opposed to that of between T
employer and employee;
U U
V V
-5-
A A
(v) Madam Tsang has visited the Defendant in prison, and
B B
has indicated some reconciliation between the two;
C C
(vi) the Defendant submits a mitigation letter, in which he
D D
reflects on his wrongs, while in the same time
E expressing remorse and asking for leniency; E
F F
(vii) the Defendant has a clear record; and
G G
(viii) the Defendant also promised to make restitution in the
H H
future.
I I
12. Defence submitted the sentencing authority for theft
J J
involving breach of trust is HKSAR v Cheung Mee Kiu2, as adjusted in
K HKSAR v Ng Kwok Wing3, where when the loss was between HK$3 million K
to HK$15 million, the sentence should be 5 to 10 years’ imprisonment.
L L
M 13. Defence also submitted other relevant sentencing M
considerations that can be found in HKSAR v Lee Lai Kit Kitty4, para 23:
N N
O 14. Relying on paras 14-16, SJ v Buk Chui Ying (Alias Buk Hiu O
Kwan) 5 , defence further submits that the present case is, at best, a
P P
borderline breach of trust case, the Court is entitled to depart from the
Q guidelines and adopt a lower starting point. Q
R R
S S
2
[2006] 4 HKLRD 776
T 3 T
[2008] 4 HKLRD 1017
4
CACC 379/2008
5
[2008] 5 HKLRD 185
U U
V V
-6-
A A
15. In the present case, although the Defendant is not able to make
B B
restitution at the time of sentence, it is submitted the Court can consider a
C starting point lower than that of 5 years’ imprisonment. C
D D
Background Report
E E
16. The background report shows the Defendant was born in the
F F
Mainland and settled in Hong Kong at his toddler age. He had an
G uneventful upbringing and eventually went to study in Australia for high G
school. When the Defendant was around 20, he returned to Hong Kong and
H H
worked at his father’s construction company. He worked in the industry for
I 20 years until his remand in custody. However, starting in 2022, he started I
associated with bad peers and became addicted to drugs and gambling,
J J
which strained relationship with his family. Towards the present offence,
K the Defendant claimed that he was in dire financial straits and hence K
committed the present offence. He used up the stolen money on gambling,
L L
drug taking and paying off his debts to friends. He undertook to lead a law-
M abiding life in the future. M
N N
Consideration
O O
17. This case is a theft of over $HK3 million. If this is a breach of
P P
trust case, according to the guidelines as stated in the authorities submitted
Q by the defence, the starting point should be 5 to 10 years’ imprisonment. Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
18. Defence now submitted that this is a borderline case of breach
B B
of trust, and asked the Court to adopt a lower starting point. When
C considering whether this is a breach of trust case, I have considered HKSAR C
v Poon Kar Yue6, para 26 where Macrae VP said
D D
E “It is a well-established principle of sentencing that where there E
exists a relationship of trust between a defendant and the victim
of his crime, his criminality is seen in more serious terms,
F F
justifying a more severe, or different type of, sentence. The
classic examples of such a relationship are an employer and
G employee, a professional and client, customer or patient, a G
teacher and pupil and a parent and child. However, there are
other types of relationship which, depending on the facts and
H circumstances, may also fit within these categories; for example, H
a pastor and a member of the congregation, a police officer and
I a citizen and, in respect of a child, anyone who stands in loco I
parentis or an adult relative or friend of the family. There is also
a relationship of trust between spouses, family members and
J close personal friends or colleagues. The defining quality of J
such relationships is that, by virtue of a person’s position or
authority, he is entrusted with access to something or someone
K K
he would not otherwise have, which he then misuses or abuses
for his own personal advantage or pleasure.” (emphasis added).
L L
19. The Defendant and Madam Tsang are friends, not employer
M M
and employee, or more typical types of relationship which we regarded as
N holding trust to the others. However, due to the long history of friendship N
between the two, the Defendant was entrusted with access to something he
O O
would not otherwise have, namely Madam Tsang’s assets, which he then
P misused for his own personal advantage. P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
6
[2018] HKCA 684
U U
V V
-8-
A A
20. The Defence relied on the Buk Chui Ying case to suggest this
B B
is a borderline breach of trust case, which the Court is entitled to depart
C from the guidelines. In the Buk Chui Ying case, the Respondent was not the C
personal friend of victim. Rather, she was the secretary of the victim’s
D D
friend.
E E
21. In our case, the assets is entrusted to the Defendant because
F F
of the intimate relationship between the victim and the Defendant. I find
G this is a breach of trust case. Even if this is not strictly a breach of trust G
case, I find there is no distinction of any real significant between the nature
H H
and manner of this theft and a breach of trust case.
I I
22. I have also considered the following factors before sentencing:
J J
K (i) Madam Tsang treated the Defendant as a friend, whom K
she entrusted her property to him;
L L
M (ii) the Defendant started misappropriated the money from M
22 September 2023 and continued until 17 January
N N
2024, for a period of just less than 4 months;
O O
(iii) the amount of money involved is just over HK$3
P P
million;
Q Q
(iv) the Defendant used the money on gambling and to
R R
repay his debt;
S S
(v) the Defendant has a clear record; and
T T
U U
V V
-9-
A A
(vi) According to the Background Report, the Defendant is
B B
addicted to drugs. However, given the severity of the
C offence, Drug Addiction Treatment Centre would not C
be a viable option for sentence. Therefore, I do not
D D
consider it is appropriate to obtain a DATC report.
E E
23. Considering all the above, I consider immediate
F F
imprisonment is the only sentencing option. A starting point of 5 years’
G imprisonment is appropriate. Given his guilty plea, a 1/3 discount is G
appropriate.
H H
I 24. The Defendant in his own initiation told Madam Tsang on 18 I
March 2024 that he had utilized money from her HSB Account, which led
J J
to the discovery of the offence. It is akin to surrendering. Therefore, I give
K the Defendant a further 3-month discount. K
L L
25. I have considered his mitigation and mitigation letters, I found
M no other mitigating factors that warrant a further discount. Therefore, the M
sentence is 37 months’ immediate imprisonment.
N N
O O
P P
Q ( Colin Wong ) Q
Deputy District Judge
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
A A
DCCC 1405/2024
B B
[2026] HKDC 61
C C
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
D D
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
E CRIMINAL CASE NO 1405 OF 2024 E
F F
------------------------------------------
G HKSAR G
V
H H
LI LEUNG FUNG
I I
------------------------------------------
J J
Before: Deputy District Judge Colin Wong
K K
Date: 9 January 2026
L
Present: Mr Lo Paulinus, Counsel-on-Fiat for HKSAR/Director of L
Public Prosecutions
M M
Mr Keung Ho, Karl, instructed by Dominic Y. K. Lai & Co.,
N for the defendant N
Offence: Theft（盜竊罪）
O O
P ----------------------------------------- P
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
Q Q
-----------------------------------------
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
1. The Defendant pleaded guilty to one count of theft1, that he
B B
stole choses in action totaling HK$3,195,090, debts owed by Hang Seng
C Bank to Madam Tsang Wai Fong. C
D D
Facts
E E
2. The Defendant has known the victim, Madam Tsang, for
F F
approximately 25 years, having been classmates during their secondary
G education and were courting until the Defendant went abroad to pursue G
further studies. They were out of contact for nearly 20 years until 2023.
H H
I I
3. Due to Madam Tsang’s strained relationship with her family,
J
she entrusted the Defendant with the management of her assets, which J
included the sale of her residential flat located at Yuen Long On Ning Road,
K K
Yuen Long, New Territories (the “Flat”), in Hong Kong prior to her
L
emigrating to Japan in April 2023. L
M M
4. The Flat was ultimately sold in June 2023 with the proceeds
N of HK$3,163,286.10, which was subsequently deposited into the Hang N
Seng Bank account (the “HSB Account”) held by Madam Tsang.
O O
P 5. On 18 March 2024, Madam Tsang received WhatsApp P
messages from the Defendant, stating that he would be leaving Hong Kong
Q Q
for a year and had utilized some money from her HSB Account.
R R
S S
T T
1
Contrary to section 9 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap 210
U U
V V
-3-
A A
6. The report detailing the history of the HSB Account for the
B B
period from 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024 (both dates inclusive) revealed,
C inter alia, the following: C
D D
(i) On 21 September 2023, a deposit of HK$3,163,286.10
E was made into the HSB Account; and E
F F
(ii) A total of 132 ATM withdrawals, amounting to
G HK$3,195,090, were made between 22 September G
2023 and 17 January 2024 (both dates inclusive).
H H
I I
7. In the WhatsApp Messages between Madam Tsang and the
J
Defendant, when Madam Tsang inquired about the status of her funds, the J
Defendant replied that it would take some time to reimburse Madam Tsang
K K
and acknowledged that it was his fault.
L L
8. On 22 April 2024 (“the Date of Arrest”) at 1:30 pm, the
M M
Defendant was arrested by DPC15643 (“PW1”) for “Theft”. Under caution
N at the scene, the Defendant said “Without asking her, I stole the money N
from her account and used it”.
O O
P 9. In a video-recorded interview conducted from 11:17 pm to P
11:51 pm on the Date of Arrest, the Defendant admitted the offence, and
Q Q
stated that he spent all the stolen money on gambling and repaying his debts.
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
Mitigation
B B
C 10. The Defendant is now 46 years old. He was born in mainland C
China and came to Hong Kong in 1981. He has been educated up to
D D
Secondary 5. He is married, with three sons, aged 24, 22 and 18
E respectively. All are still in full-time education. His second son suffers E
from severe congenital intellectual disability and physical impairment, is
F F
unable to care for himself and requires constant supervision. The
G Defendant had been the sole breadwinner for the family. Before his arrest, G
he worked for many years in the construction industry and at the time of
H H
the offence, he was employed as a foreman, earning about HK$23,500 per
I I
month. After his remand, his wife had to seek employment, while his nearly
J
70 year-old mother now helps care for the disable son. J
K K
11. These are the mitigating factors submitted:
L L
(i) the Defendant pleaded guilty in the first available
M M
opportunity;
N N
(ii) the Defendant has shown remorse by making frank
O O
admission first to Madam Tsang and later to the Police;
P P
(iii) the Defendant committed the present offence out of
Q Q
desperation, as he needed money to repay the various
R debts he owed; R
S S
(iv) the breach of trust is that of between friends, not the
T worst of its kind, as opposed to that of between T
employer and employee;
U U
V V
-5-
A A
(v) Madam Tsang has visited the Defendant in prison, and
B B
has indicated some reconciliation between the two;
C C
(vi) the Defendant submits a mitigation letter, in which he
D D
reflects on his wrongs, while in the same time
E expressing remorse and asking for leniency; E
F F
(vii) the Defendant has a clear record; and
G G
(viii) the Defendant also promised to make restitution in the
H H
future.
I I
12. Defence submitted the sentencing authority for theft
J J
involving breach of trust is HKSAR v Cheung Mee Kiu2, as adjusted in
K HKSAR v Ng Kwok Wing3, where when the loss was between HK$3 million K
to HK$15 million, the sentence should be 5 to 10 years’ imprisonment.
L L
M 13. Defence also submitted other relevant sentencing M
considerations that can be found in HKSAR v Lee Lai Kit Kitty4, para 23:
N N
O 14. Relying on paras 14-16, SJ v Buk Chui Ying (Alias Buk Hiu O
Kwan) 5 , defence further submits that the present case is, at best, a
P P
borderline breach of trust case, the Court is entitled to depart from the
Q guidelines and adopt a lower starting point. Q
R R
S S
2
[2006] 4 HKLRD 776
T 3 T
[2008] 4 HKLRD 1017
4
CACC 379/2008
5
[2008] 5 HKLRD 185
U U
V V
-6-
A A
15. In the present case, although the Defendant is not able to make
B B
restitution at the time of sentence, it is submitted the Court can consider a
C starting point lower than that of 5 years’ imprisonment. C
D D
Background Report
E E
16. The background report shows the Defendant was born in the
F F
Mainland and settled in Hong Kong at his toddler age. He had an
G uneventful upbringing and eventually went to study in Australia for high G
school. When the Defendant was around 20, he returned to Hong Kong and
H H
worked at his father’s construction company. He worked in the industry for
I 20 years until his remand in custody. However, starting in 2022, he started I
associated with bad peers and became addicted to drugs and gambling,
J J
which strained relationship with his family. Towards the present offence,
K the Defendant claimed that he was in dire financial straits and hence K
committed the present offence. He used up the stolen money on gambling,
L L
drug taking and paying off his debts to friends. He undertook to lead a law-
M abiding life in the future. M
N N
Consideration
O O
17. This case is a theft of over $HK3 million. If this is a breach of
P P
trust case, according to the guidelines as stated in the authorities submitted
Q by the defence, the starting point should be 5 to 10 years’ imprisonment. Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
18. Defence now submitted that this is a borderline case of breach
B B
of trust, and asked the Court to adopt a lower starting point. When
C considering whether this is a breach of trust case, I have considered HKSAR C
v Poon Kar Yue6, para 26 where Macrae VP said
D D
E “It is a well-established principle of sentencing that where there E
exists a relationship of trust between a defendant and the victim
of his crime, his criminality is seen in more serious terms,
F F
justifying a more severe, or different type of, sentence. The
classic examples of such a relationship are an employer and
G employee, a professional and client, customer or patient, a G
teacher and pupil and a parent and child. However, there are
other types of relationship which, depending on the facts and
H circumstances, may also fit within these categories; for example, H
a pastor and a member of the congregation, a police officer and
I a citizen and, in respect of a child, anyone who stands in loco I
parentis or an adult relative or friend of the family. There is also
a relationship of trust between spouses, family members and
J close personal friends or colleagues. The defining quality of J
such relationships is that, by virtue of a person’s position or
authority, he is entrusted with access to something or someone
K K
he would not otherwise have, which he then misuses or abuses
for his own personal advantage or pleasure.” (emphasis added).
L L
19. The Defendant and Madam Tsang are friends, not employer
M M
and employee, or more typical types of relationship which we regarded as
N holding trust to the others. However, due to the long history of friendship N
between the two, the Defendant was entrusted with access to something he
O O
would not otherwise have, namely Madam Tsang’s assets, which he then
P misused for his own personal advantage. P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
6
[2018] HKCA 684
U U
V V
-8-
A A
20. The Defence relied on the Buk Chui Ying case to suggest this
B B
is a borderline breach of trust case, which the Court is entitled to depart
C from the guidelines. In the Buk Chui Ying case, the Respondent was not the C
personal friend of victim. Rather, she was the secretary of the victim’s
D D
friend.
E E
21. In our case, the assets is entrusted to the Defendant because
F F
of the intimate relationship between the victim and the Defendant. I find
G this is a breach of trust case. Even if this is not strictly a breach of trust G
case, I find there is no distinction of any real significant between the nature
H H
and manner of this theft and a breach of trust case.
I I
22. I have also considered the following factors before sentencing:
J J
K (i) Madam Tsang treated the Defendant as a friend, whom K
she entrusted her property to him;
L L
M (ii) the Defendant started misappropriated the money from M
22 September 2023 and continued until 17 January
N N
2024, for a period of just less than 4 months;
O O
(iii) the amount of money involved is just over HK$3
P P
million;
Q Q
(iv) the Defendant used the money on gambling and to
R R
repay his debt;
S S
(v) the Defendant has a clear record; and
T T
U U
V V
-9-
A A
(vi) According to the Background Report, the Defendant is
B B
addicted to drugs. However, given the severity of the
C offence, Drug Addiction Treatment Centre would not C
be a viable option for sentence. Therefore, I do not
D D
consider it is appropriate to obtain a DATC report.
E E
23. Considering all the above, I consider immediate
F F
imprisonment is the only sentencing option. A starting point of 5 years’
G imprisonment is appropriate. Given his guilty plea, a 1/3 discount is G
appropriate.
H H
I 24. The Defendant in his own initiation told Madam Tsang on 18 I
March 2024 that he had utilized money from her HSB Account, which led
J J
to the discovery of the offence. It is akin to surrendering. Therefore, I give
K the Defendant a further 3-month discount. K
L L
25. I have considered his mitigation and mitigation letters, I found
M no other mitigating factors that warrant a further discount. Therefore, the M
sentence is 37 months’ immediate imprisonment.
N N
O O
P P
Q ( Colin Wong ) Q
Deputy District Judge
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V