A A
B B
DCCC 926/2019
C [2020] HKDC 744 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 926 OF 2019
F F
G ------------------------------ G
HKSAR
H H
v
I YU CHUN LUNG I
------------------------------
J J
K Before: HH Judge Sham K
Date: 1 September 2020
L L
Present: Ms Cecilia Liang, Counsel on fiat, for HKSAR
M Mr Chong Chun-sang, Matthew instructed by Messrs. Tang M
Wong & Cheung assigned by the Director of Legal Aid for
N N
the defendant.
O Offence: Possession of ammunition without a licence (無牌管有彈藥) O
P P
---------------------------------------
Q Q
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
R
--------------------------------------- R
S S
1. The defendant, a 48-year-old man, pleaded guilty before me
T to one count of possession of ammunition without a licence contrary to T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
section 13(1) and (2) of the Firearms and Ammunition Ordinance,
C Cap.238. C
D D
2. The particulars of the offence are as follows:
E E
i. 6 fired cartridge cases in 9 x 19mm calibre;
F ii. One empty cylindrical-shaped grenade body (40mm in diameter) with no F
explosive chemical residues;
G iii. One cylindrical-shaped grenade body (40mm in diameter) with no explosive G
chemical residues;
H H
iv. One cylindrical-shaped grenade body (40mm in diameter) with a non-explosive
filling;
I I
v. One primed cartridge case in 9 x 19mm calibre;
J vi. 3 live cartridges in 9 x 19mm calibre; J
vii. Two live blank cartridges in 9 x 19mm calibre;
K viii. Two live cartridges in 5.8 x 42mm calibre; K
ix. Two fired cartridge cases in 5.8 x 42mm calibre;
L L
x. One discharged rifle bullet in .30” calibre;
M
xi. One bullet in 9mm calibre; M
xii. One fired cartridge case in 12.7 x 108mm calibre; and
N xiii. One box of industrial cartridges containing 96 live rounds of blank ammunition N
in .27” short calibre.
O O
3. It is worth mentioning here that except for the last item (i.e.
P P
xiii - one box of industrial cartridges containing 96 live rounds of blank
Q
ammunition in .27” short calibre) as particularised in the charge which was Q
R
a tool consumable used by the defendant in his work in the construction R
site, the rest of the ammunitions were bullets (live and used) and used
S S
grenade bodies which had been picked up by the defendant over the years
T in the vicinity of the firing range of the People’s Liberation Army near T
where he lived.
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
4. The defendant posted a photograph of 6 cartridges on his
C facebook, which perhaps alerted the police who, on 28 June 2017, paid him C
a visit at his home in Shek Wu San Tsuen, Sheung Shui, armed with a
D D
search warrant. The officers found those ammunitions in a green military
E case. E
F 5. He told the officers that he picked up those ammunitions at a F
firing range at various times over the years in Sheung Shui as a keepsake
G G
only. As far as the box of industrial cartridges was concerned, he obtained
H it from a foreman to be used by him in his construction work. H
I 6. The ammunitions in question were examined by a firearms I
expert of the police, SP Ng, together with a bomb disposal officer, CIP Lai.
J J
They divided the ammunitions into 3 categories for examination – the box
K K
of industrial cartridges, the grenade bodies and the rest of the ammunitions.
L L
7. The said industrial cartridges were confirmed to be gas
M producing cartridges designed to be used in a tool and can propel objects M
into concrete.
N N
8. The grenade bodies were either found with no explosive
O O
chemical residues or with a non-explosive filing.
P P
9. While for the rest of the ammunitions, the results of their
Q Q
examination were set out in the following table:
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
Items Ref. in Ammunition Firearms Fired/ Damage likely to
Charge suitable for Not cause
C C
discharge used
D 1 i 6 fired cartridges Like calibre Fired Just cartridge D
cases in 9 x 19mm firearms such as cases
E calibre GLOCK 17 E
pistol
F F
3 v 1 primed cartridge Like calibre Not No projectile, for
case in 9 x 19mm firearms such as used training use but
G G
calibre GLOCK 17 require protective
H pistol gear when using, H
can cause fatal
I I
injuries
4 vi 3 live cartridges in Like calibre Not Projectile filled
J J
9 x 19mm calibre firearms such as used with marker for
K GLOCK 17 training use but K
pistol require protective
L gear, can cause L
fatal injuries
M M
5 vii 2 live blank Like calibre Not For loud noise
cartridges in 9 x firearms such as used effect, no
N N
19mm calibre Heckler & projectile
O Koch MP5 sub- O
machine gun
P P
6 viii 2 live cartridges in Like calibre Not One with plastic
5.8 x 42mm firearms such as used bullet, less energy
Q Q
calibre NORINCO than metal bullet.
R Type 95 assault One with metal R
rifle bullet, can
S penetrate body S
armor
T T
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
7 ix 2 fired cartridges Like calibre Fired Not likely to
cases in 5.8 x firearms such as recycle
C C
42mm calibre NORINCO
D Type 95 assault D
rifle
E 8 x 1 discharged rifle Like calibre Fired Not likely to E
bullet in 30” firearms such as recycle
F F
calibre Heckler &
Koch G3
G G
automatic rifle
H 9 xi 1 bullet in 9mm Like calibre Not GLOCK 17, H
calibre firearms such as used pistol
I I
GLOCK 17
pistol
J J
10 xii 1 fired cartridge Like calibre Fired Not likely to
K case in 12.7 x firearms such as recycle K
108mm calibre Chinese Type
L 77 machine gun L
M M
N 10. Regarding item 9 in the table where it says “GLOCK 17” N
pistol in the column “Damage likely to cause”, it means that the bullet
O O
could be fired from a “GLOCK 17” pistol and the damage is equivalent to
P a shot from such a pistol. P
Q Q
11. The defendant, still single, has a girlfriend who is in court
R today to show concern and support for the defendant. Though he has 9 prior R
S
convictions none of which is similar to the present offence. S
T T
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
12. His records show 4 convictions involving violence (common
C assault, AOABH, resisting arrest and criminal damage), two blackmail, C
one theft, one possession of Part One poison and one claiming MOTS.
D D
13. In mitigation, the court heard that the defendant worked as a
E E
construction site worker, and those industrial cartridges were actually his
F work tools, he would use them on nail guns. F
G G
14. As for the ammunitions he picked up from outside, counsel
H
for the defendant, Mr Chong submitted that the defendant had no intention H
to use them for any illegal purposes – for the live ones he did not have the
I I
firearms to fire them, and for the used ones they could no longer be used
J to injure others- the potential risk thus posed by the ammunitions would be J
very small.
K K
15. Mr Chong went on to say that the defendant had those
L L
ammunitions for collection purpose only, and as he lived alone, they were
M not easily accessible by others, and given the fact that he had no previous M
similar conviction, the court could deal with him in a lenient way. Mr
N N
Chong cited in support the case of Yu Chi Lap CACC 656/1982.
O O
16. In Yu’s case, the appellant, a former police officer, was found
P P
in possession of 3 live rounds of revolver ammunition without a licence,
Q pleaded guilty to the same charge as in the present case admitting to Q
obtaining these rounds from a range course when he was a member of the
R R
police force CID, and was given a 18-month jail term.
S S
17. Reducing the term to one of 6 months on appeal, the Appellate
T T
Court had this to say:
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
“……What made the case more serious than normal was the fact
C that you obtained these rounds when you were still a serving C
police officer. We bear in mind that you did not have any arms,
no gun and no suspicious or sinister motive was suggested for
D the retention of this ammunition. You are 29 years old. You have D
a clear record and you pleaded guilty to this offence.”
E E
18. In more recent authorities which are mainly dealing with
F possession of arms with ammunition rather than ammunition alone as in F
the present case, the overwhelming concern is still on the question of the
G G
risk of danger it could pose to the public.
H H
19. Turning now to the present case, the defendant is not a person
I I
of clean record, he has records of violent crimes, in particular he once
J J
claimed himself to be a triad member when he blackmailed and injured
K
somebody back in 2012 for which he was sent to prison. If he was not of K
dubious character, his friends or associates might be. When a person like
L L
the defendant possessed ammunition, there was potential such ammunition
M might be put to unlawful use. M
N 20. It could be argued in his favour, however, that for those N
ammunition he picked up from outside, it may seem large supply but in
O O
fact only a small number of them capable of causing injuries (i.e. those live
P rounds like items 4, 6 and 9 see paragraph 9 above – 6 rounds in total); P
coupling with the fact that he did not have any arms, the risk of danger to
Q Q
the public might lie towards the lower end of the scale. Given the case as
R it was, I am prepared to conclude that the risk was on the low side. R
S S
21. This case happened in June 2017; more than 3 years went by
T when it came before me for sentencing. On the question of delay as a T
ground for reduction of sentence, Mr Chong indicated to the court that they
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
would not rely on such ground; they accepted it to be reasonable in the
C circumstances because time was needed to examine the ammunition in C
question and the delay, if any, was not undue delay.
D D
22. It is worth mentioning that such offence carries a maximum
E E
term of 14 years’ imprisonment and a fine up to $100,000.
F F
23. Based on the facts of the case and taking all the mitigation
G G
into account, I take 12 months as the starting point and reduce it to 8
H
months to reflect his timely plea. There being no reasons for any further H
reduction in sentence, the defendant is therefore sentenced to 8 months’
I I
imprisonment.
J J
K K
L L
( Sham )
District Judge
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 926/2019
C [2020] HKDC 744 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 926 OF 2019
F F
G ------------------------------ G
HKSAR
H H
v
I YU CHUN LUNG I
------------------------------
J J
K Before: HH Judge Sham K
Date: 1 September 2020
L L
Present: Ms Cecilia Liang, Counsel on fiat, for HKSAR
M Mr Chong Chun-sang, Matthew instructed by Messrs. Tang M
Wong & Cheung assigned by the Director of Legal Aid for
N N
the defendant.
O Offence: Possession of ammunition without a licence (無牌管有彈藥) O
P P
---------------------------------------
Q Q
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
R
--------------------------------------- R
S S
1. The defendant, a 48-year-old man, pleaded guilty before me
T to one count of possession of ammunition without a licence contrary to T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
section 13(1) and (2) of the Firearms and Ammunition Ordinance,
C Cap.238. C
D D
2. The particulars of the offence are as follows:
E E
i. 6 fired cartridge cases in 9 x 19mm calibre;
F ii. One empty cylindrical-shaped grenade body (40mm in diameter) with no F
explosive chemical residues;
G iii. One cylindrical-shaped grenade body (40mm in diameter) with no explosive G
chemical residues;
H H
iv. One cylindrical-shaped grenade body (40mm in diameter) with a non-explosive
filling;
I I
v. One primed cartridge case in 9 x 19mm calibre;
J vi. 3 live cartridges in 9 x 19mm calibre; J
vii. Two live blank cartridges in 9 x 19mm calibre;
K viii. Two live cartridges in 5.8 x 42mm calibre; K
ix. Two fired cartridge cases in 5.8 x 42mm calibre;
L L
x. One discharged rifle bullet in .30” calibre;
M
xi. One bullet in 9mm calibre; M
xii. One fired cartridge case in 12.7 x 108mm calibre; and
N xiii. One box of industrial cartridges containing 96 live rounds of blank ammunition N
in .27” short calibre.
O O
3. It is worth mentioning here that except for the last item (i.e.
P P
xiii - one box of industrial cartridges containing 96 live rounds of blank
Q
ammunition in .27” short calibre) as particularised in the charge which was Q
R
a tool consumable used by the defendant in his work in the construction R
site, the rest of the ammunitions were bullets (live and used) and used
S S
grenade bodies which had been picked up by the defendant over the years
T in the vicinity of the firing range of the People’s Liberation Army near T
where he lived.
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
4. The defendant posted a photograph of 6 cartridges on his
C facebook, which perhaps alerted the police who, on 28 June 2017, paid him C
a visit at his home in Shek Wu San Tsuen, Sheung Shui, armed with a
D D
search warrant. The officers found those ammunitions in a green military
E case. E
F 5. He told the officers that he picked up those ammunitions at a F
firing range at various times over the years in Sheung Shui as a keepsake
G G
only. As far as the box of industrial cartridges was concerned, he obtained
H it from a foreman to be used by him in his construction work. H
I 6. The ammunitions in question were examined by a firearms I
expert of the police, SP Ng, together with a bomb disposal officer, CIP Lai.
J J
They divided the ammunitions into 3 categories for examination – the box
K K
of industrial cartridges, the grenade bodies and the rest of the ammunitions.
L L
7. The said industrial cartridges were confirmed to be gas
M producing cartridges designed to be used in a tool and can propel objects M
into concrete.
N N
8. The grenade bodies were either found with no explosive
O O
chemical residues or with a non-explosive filing.
P P
9. While for the rest of the ammunitions, the results of their
Q Q
examination were set out in the following table:
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
Items Ref. in Ammunition Firearms Fired/ Damage likely to
Charge suitable for Not cause
C C
discharge used
D 1 i 6 fired cartridges Like calibre Fired Just cartridge D
cases in 9 x 19mm firearms such as cases
E calibre GLOCK 17 E
pistol
F F
3 v 1 primed cartridge Like calibre Not No projectile, for
case in 9 x 19mm firearms such as used training use but
G G
calibre GLOCK 17 require protective
H pistol gear when using, H
can cause fatal
I I
injuries
4 vi 3 live cartridges in Like calibre Not Projectile filled
J J
9 x 19mm calibre firearms such as used with marker for
K GLOCK 17 training use but K
pistol require protective
L gear, can cause L
fatal injuries
M M
5 vii 2 live blank Like calibre Not For loud noise
cartridges in 9 x firearms such as used effect, no
N N
19mm calibre Heckler & projectile
O Koch MP5 sub- O
machine gun
P P
6 viii 2 live cartridges in Like calibre Not One with plastic
5.8 x 42mm firearms such as used bullet, less energy
Q Q
calibre NORINCO than metal bullet.
R Type 95 assault One with metal R
rifle bullet, can
S penetrate body S
armor
T T
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
7 ix 2 fired cartridges Like calibre Fired Not likely to
cases in 5.8 x firearms such as recycle
C C
42mm calibre NORINCO
D Type 95 assault D
rifle
E 8 x 1 discharged rifle Like calibre Fired Not likely to E
bullet in 30” firearms such as recycle
F F
calibre Heckler &
Koch G3
G G
automatic rifle
H 9 xi 1 bullet in 9mm Like calibre Not GLOCK 17, H
calibre firearms such as used pistol
I I
GLOCK 17
pistol
J J
10 xii 1 fired cartridge Like calibre Fired Not likely to
K case in 12.7 x firearms such as recycle K
108mm calibre Chinese Type
L 77 machine gun L
M M
N 10. Regarding item 9 in the table where it says “GLOCK 17” N
pistol in the column “Damage likely to cause”, it means that the bullet
O O
could be fired from a “GLOCK 17” pistol and the damage is equivalent to
P a shot from such a pistol. P
Q Q
11. The defendant, still single, has a girlfriend who is in court
R today to show concern and support for the defendant. Though he has 9 prior R
S
convictions none of which is similar to the present offence. S
T T
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
12. His records show 4 convictions involving violence (common
C assault, AOABH, resisting arrest and criminal damage), two blackmail, C
one theft, one possession of Part One poison and one claiming MOTS.
D D
13. In mitigation, the court heard that the defendant worked as a
E E
construction site worker, and those industrial cartridges were actually his
F work tools, he would use them on nail guns. F
G G
14. As for the ammunitions he picked up from outside, counsel
H
for the defendant, Mr Chong submitted that the defendant had no intention H
to use them for any illegal purposes – for the live ones he did not have the
I I
firearms to fire them, and for the used ones they could no longer be used
J to injure others- the potential risk thus posed by the ammunitions would be J
very small.
K K
15. Mr Chong went on to say that the defendant had those
L L
ammunitions for collection purpose only, and as he lived alone, they were
M not easily accessible by others, and given the fact that he had no previous M
similar conviction, the court could deal with him in a lenient way. Mr
N N
Chong cited in support the case of Yu Chi Lap CACC 656/1982.
O O
16. In Yu’s case, the appellant, a former police officer, was found
P P
in possession of 3 live rounds of revolver ammunition without a licence,
Q pleaded guilty to the same charge as in the present case admitting to Q
obtaining these rounds from a range course when he was a member of the
R R
police force CID, and was given a 18-month jail term.
S S
17. Reducing the term to one of 6 months on appeal, the Appellate
T T
Court had this to say:
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
“……What made the case more serious than normal was the fact
C that you obtained these rounds when you were still a serving C
police officer. We bear in mind that you did not have any arms,
no gun and no suspicious or sinister motive was suggested for
D the retention of this ammunition. You are 29 years old. You have D
a clear record and you pleaded guilty to this offence.”
E E
18. In more recent authorities which are mainly dealing with
F possession of arms with ammunition rather than ammunition alone as in F
the present case, the overwhelming concern is still on the question of the
G G
risk of danger it could pose to the public.
H H
19. Turning now to the present case, the defendant is not a person
I I
of clean record, he has records of violent crimes, in particular he once
J J
claimed himself to be a triad member when he blackmailed and injured
K
somebody back in 2012 for which he was sent to prison. If he was not of K
dubious character, his friends or associates might be. When a person like
L L
the defendant possessed ammunition, there was potential such ammunition
M might be put to unlawful use. M
N 20. It could be argued in his favour, however, that for those N
ammunition he picked up from outside, it may seem large supply but in
O O
fact only a small number of them capable of causing injuries (i.e. those live
P rounds like items 4, 6 and 9 see paragraph 9 above – 6 rounds in total); P
coupling with the fact that he did not have any arms, the risk of danger to
Q Q
the public might lie towards the lower end of the scale. Given the case as
R it was, I am prepared to conclude that the risk was on the low side. R
S S
21. This case happened in June 2017; more than 3 years went by
T when it came before me for sentencing. On the question of delay as a T
ground for reduction of sentence, Mr Chong indicated to the court that they
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
would not rely on such ground; they accepted it to be reasonable in the
C circumstances because time was needed to examine the ammunition in C
question and the delay, if any, was not undue delay.
D D
22. It is worth mentioning that such offence carries a maximum
E E
term of 14 years’ imprisonment and a fine up to $100,000.
F F
23. Based on the facts of the case and taking all the mitigation
G G
into account, I take 12 months as the starting point and reduce it to 8
H
months to reflect his timely plea. There being no reasons for any further H
reduction in sentence, the defendant is therefore sentenced to 8 months’
I I
imprisonment.
J J
K K
L L
( Sham )
District Judge
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V