由此
A A
B DCCC 558/2024 B
[2026] HKDC 108
C C
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
D D
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
E CRIMINAL CASE NO. 558 OF 2024 E
F
____________ F
G HKSAR G
v
H H
CHAU Hiu-kang
I ____________ I
J J
Before : H.H. Judge G. Lam
K Date : 15 January 2026 K
Present : Mr. Charles Lee, SPP, of the Department of
Justice, for HKSAR.
L L
Mr. Dickson Li instructed by M/s Michael Ngai &
Co., assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the
M M
defendant.
Offence : Dealing with property known or believed to
N represent proceeds of an indictable offence（處理 N
已知道或相信為代表從可公訴罪行的得益的
O 財產） O
P P
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
Q Q
R R
The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of "Money
S S
laundering". In short, she lent her bank account to someone.
T T
U U
V V
由此
- 2 -
A A
Summary of Facts
B B
C 2. On 25 August 2020, the defendant opened a personal savings C
D account (No.60750126186) with CMB Wing Lung Bank Limited (the D
E
"Account"). In the opening mandate, she claimed to be self-employed in the E
education field with a monthly revenue below $100,000.
F F
G G
Cryptocurrency deception
H H
I 3. On 8 July 2020, Madam Cheung (PW1) became acquainted I
J
with someone (Male A) on a social networking app. Male A invited PW1 to J
invest in cryptocurrencies by clicking a link ("the Investment App"). On 14
K K
September 2020, PW1 transferred a sum of $60,000 from her own bank
L L
account to the Account pursuant to directions given by the Investment App.
M M
Subsequently, PW1 could no longer log onto the Investment App and Male
N N
A became out of touch. The police was alerted.
O O
P P
Deposits and withdrawals
Q Q
4. Between 14 September and 29 October 2020, the Account
R R
received 107 deposits, which aggregated to a sum of $2,826,255.26
S S
(including the $60,000 from PW1). Simultaneously, the same aggregated
T T
sum was withdrawn from the Account by 94 withdrawals. The Account was
U U
V V
由此
- 3 -
A A
closed on 29 October 2020. Based on the timing and amount of the deposits
B B
and withdrawals, the police found a "mirror pattern" in those transactions,
C C
which is a typical indicator of money laundering.
D D
E E
5. The defendant was arrested on 29 May 2023.
F F
G Mitigation & Sentence G
H H
6. The defendant is 44 and has 4 conviction records involving 5
I I
offences unrelated to money laundering. Defence counsel Mr. Li informed
J J
me that the defendant is not married but has 1 daughter and 2 sons. She was
K K
unemployed at the time of her arrest. She resides in a public housing unit in
L Tseung Kwan O. In mitigation, Mr. Li submitted that the defendant simply L
M lent her bank account to someone for his/her use. M
N N
7. The prosecution has applied for an enhanced sentence pursuant
O O
to section 27(2)(c) and (d) of the Organized and Serious Crimes Ordinance
P P
(Cap.455) on the basis of prevalence as well as the nature and extent of harm
Q Q
caused to the community. Mr. Li did not object.
R R
S S
8. I bear in mind the Court of Appeal's decision in HKSAR v Xu
T T
Mai Qing CACC 464/2005, whereas Yeung JA (as he then was) held "Under
U U
V V
由此
- 4 -
A A
section 27(11) of OSCO, what the prosecution has to prove is the prevalence
B B
of the offence, not the increase in the number of such offences1."
C C
D D
9. I have read the witness statement of CIP Li dated 29 December
E E
2025. I am satisfied that in 2020, deception-related money laundering cases
F F
were prevalent in Hong Kong in terms of the number of cases as well as the
G total value of monetary loss. G
H H
I 10. There is clear and cogent evidence before me that money I
J
laundering through bank accounts opened by "ML Stooges" remains J
widespread in Hong Kong today. What true criminals need are gullible
K K
scapegoats, like the defendant in the present case, who would take the blame
L L
for them when law enforcement takes action. The court must send a clear
M M
message to the general public that people who play the role of "ML Stooge"
N N
will receive severe punishment, so that there is a deterrent effect. When
O O
there are few or no willing "ML Stooges", criminal activities which rely on
P P
their bank accounts will fail.
Q Q
R 11. This is a typical case of money laundering by way of a stooge R
S
bank account. Even if the defendant did not know about the cryptocurrency S
T T
1
Paragraph 16 on p.4 of the judgment.
U U
V V
由此
- 5 -
A A
investment fraud against PW1, such a scam would have been meaningless
B B
without the Account. Assuming what the defendant said is true, given her
C C
role, the total sum which went through the Account and the overall
D D
circumstances, I grant the prosecution's application and will enhance the
E E
sentence by 25%.
F F
G 12. The Court of Appeal in SJ v Wan Kwok Keung [2012] 1 G
H HKLRD 201 held :- H
I Generally, the sentence for "money laundering" offences should mainly I
reflect the amount of "black money" laundered and not the benefit obtained
J J
by the defendant or others. The reason being that it is very difficult to prove
the benefit concerned, and in most "money laundering" cases, there may
K K
not be evidence to show from what indictable offence the "black money" are
L in fact derived. Of course, if there is information to prove that the "black L
money" is originated from serious crimes, including drug trafficking,
M kidnap and blackmail, illegal human trafficking, other organized crimes, M
etc. or the defendant's benefit is huge, then the sentence should be adjusted
N N
upward.2
O O
P 13. In determining the proper starting point, I have reminded P
Q myself of the sentencing principles laid down in HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] Q
R
5 HKLRD 545 and HKSAR v Boma Amaso [2012] 2 HKLRD 33. I have R
also borne in mind the amount of money involved, the duration of the
S S
T T
2
Paragraphs 12 and 13, pp 204-205.
U U
V V
由此
- 6 -
A A
offence, the defendant's role in relation to the movements of funds as well as
B B
her personal circumstances.
C C
D D
14. In SJ v Ngai Fung Sin Apple [2013] 5 HKLRD 104, Yeung V-P
E E
held :-
F F
Neither the fact that the "illicit/black money" was actually not derived from
G an indictable offence nor the defendant's ignorance of the actual source of G
the "illicit/black money" is necessarily a valid mitigating factor…3
H H
I I
15. I accept there is no evidence showing that the defendant was
J J
involved in or had any knowledge of the investment scam against PW1. As
K the sole owner of the Account, the defendant should have retained its K
L ultimate control and paid attention to its transactions on a regular basis. On L
M the other hand, I cannot overlook the fact that a total sum of $2.8 million odd M
went through the Account within almost 1.5 months.
N N
O O
16. By lending her bank account to someone and thus allowing
P P
funds of unknown origins to pass through the Account, the defendant played
Q Q
a pivotal role in helping the mastermind(s) of criminal activities to access
R R
their illegal funds without revealing their identities.
S S
T T
3
Paragraph 44, p 114.
U U
V V
由此
- 7 -
A A
17. I consider a starting point of 3.5 years' imprisonment
B B
appropriate and just4. With the timely guilty plea, the sentence is reduced to
C C
28 months. Apart from this, I see no other mitigating factors which warrant
D D
any further reduction. With the 25% enhancement, I sentence the defendant
E E
to 35 months' imprisonment.
F F
G G
H (G. Lam) H
District Judge
I I
J J
K K
L L
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
4
According to Wan Kwok Keung (supra), the starting point is 3 years or so where the "black
T money" involved is between $1 million and $2 million; and 4 years or so, if between $3 million T
and $6 million. (See paragraph 15 of the judgment)
U U
V V
由此
A A
B DCCC 558/2024 B
[2026] HKDC 108
C C
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
D D
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
E CRIMINAL CASE NO. 558 OF 2024 E
F
____________ F
G HKSAR G
v
H H
CHAU Hiu-kang
I ____________ I
J J
Before : H.H. Judge G. Lam
K Date : 15 January 2026 K
Present : Mr. Charles Lee, SPP, of the Department of
Justice, for HKSAR.
L L
Mr. Dickson Li instructed by M/s Michael Ngai &
Co., assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the
M M
defendant.
Offence : Dealing with property known or believed to
N represent proceeds of an indictable offence（處理 N
已知道或相信為代表從可公訴罪行的得益的
O 財產） O
P P
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
Q Q
R R
The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of "Money
S S
laundering". In short, she lent her bank account to someone.
T T
U U
V V
由此
- 2 -
A A
Summary of Facts
B B
C 2. On 25 August 2020, the defendant opened a personal savings C
D account (No.60750126186) with CMB Wing Lung Bank Limited (the D
E
"Account"). In the opening mandate, she claimed to be self-employed in the E
education field with a monthly revenue below $100,000.
F F
G G
Cryptocurrency deception
H H
I 3. On 8 July 2020, Madam Cheung (PW1) became acquainted I
J
with someone (Male A) on a social networking app. Male A invited PW1 to J
invest in cryptocurrencies by clicking a link ("the Investment App"). On 14
K K
September 2020, PW1 transferred a sum of $60,000 from her own bank
L L
account to the Account pursuant to directions given by the Investment App.
M M
Subsequently, PW1 could no longer log onto the Investment App and Male
N N
A became out of touch. The police was alerted.
O O
P P
Deposits and withdrawals
Q Q
4. Between 14 September and 29 October 2020, the Account
R R
received 107 deposits, which aggregated to a sum of $2,826,255.26
S S
(including the $60,000 from PW1). Simultaneously, the same aggregated
T T
sum was withdrawn from the Account by 94 withdrawals. The Account was
U U
V V
由此
- 3 -
A A
closed on 29 October 2020. Based on the timing and amount of the deposits
B B
and withdrawals, the police found a "mirror pattern" in those transactions,
C C
which is a typical indicator of money laundering.
D D
E E
5. The defendant was arrested on 29 May 2023.
F F
G Mitigation & Sentence G
H H
6. The defendant is 44 and has 4 conviction records involving 5
I I
offences unrelated to money laundering. Defence counsel Mr. Li informed
J J
me that the defendant is not married but has 1 daughter and 2 sons. She was
K K
unemployed at the time of her arrest. She resides in a public housing unit in
L Tseung Kwan O. In mitigation, Mr. Li submitted that the defendant simply L
M lent her bank account to someone for his/her use. M
N N
7. The prosecution has applied for an enhanced sentence pursuant
O O
to section 27(2)(c) and (d) of the Organized and Serious Crimes Ordinance
P P
(Cap.455) on the basis of prevalence as well as the nature and extent of harm
Q Q
caused to the community. Mr. Li did not object.
R R
S S
8. I bear in mind the Court of Appeal's decision in HKSAR v Xu
T T
Mai Qing CACC 464/2005, whereas Yeung JA (as he then was) held "Under
U U
V V
由此
- 4 -
A A
section 27(11) of OSCO, what the prosecution has to prove is the prevalence
B B
of the offence, not the increase in the number of such offences1."
C C
D D
9. I have read the witness statement of CIP Li dated 29 December
E E
2025. I am satisfied that in 2020, deception-related money laundering cases
F F
were prevalent in Hong Kong in terms of the number of cases as well as the
G total value of monetary loss. G
H H
I 10. There is clear and cogent evidence before me that money I
J
laundering through bank accounts opened by "ML Stooges" remains J
widespread in Hong Kong today. What true criminals need are gullible
K K
scapegoats, like the defendant in the present case, who would take the blame
L L
for them when law enforcement takes action. The court must send a clear
M M
message to the general public that people who play the role of "ML Stooge"
N N
will receive severe punishment, so that there is a deterrent effect. When
O O
there are few or no willing "ML Stooges", criminal activities which rely on
P P
their bank accounts will fail.
Q Q
R 11. This is a typical case of money laundering by way of a stooge R
S
bank account. Even if the defendant did not know about the cryptocurrency S
T T
1
Paragraph 16 on p.4 of the judgment.
U U
V V
由此
- 5 -
A A
investment fraud against PW1, such a scam would have been meaningless
B B
without the Account. Assuming what the defendant said is true, given her
C C
role, the total sum which went through the Account and the overall
D D
circumstances, I grant the prosecution's application and will enhance the
E E
sentence by 25%.
F F
G 12. The Court of Appeal in SJ v Wan Kwok Keung [2012] 1 G
H HKLRD 201 held :- H
I Generally, the sentence for "money laundering" offences should mainly I
reflect the amount of "black money" laundered and not the benefit obtained
J J
by the defendant or others. The reason being that it is very difficult to prove
the benefit concerned, and in most "money laundering" cases, there may
K K
not be evidence to show from what indictable offence the "black money" are
L in fact derived. Of course, if there is information to prove that the "black L
money" is originated from serious crimes, including drug trafficking,
M kidnap and blackmail, illegal human trafficking, other organized crimes, M
etc. or the defendant's benefit is huge, then the sentence should be adjusted
N N
upward.2
O O
P 13. In determining the proper starting point, I have reminded P
Q myself of the sentencing principles laid down in HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] Q
R
5 HKLRD 545 and HKSAR v Boma Amaso [2012] 2 HKLRD 33. I have R
also borne in mind the amount of money involved, the duration of the
S S
T T
2
Paragraphs 12 and 13, pp 204-205.
U U
V V
由此
- 6 -
A A
offence, the defendant's role in relation to the movements of funds as well as
B B
her personal circumstances.
C C
D D
14. In SJ v Ngai Fung Sin Apple [2013] 5 HKLRD 104, Yeung V-P
E E
held :-
F F
Neither the fact that the "illicit/black money" was actually not derived from
G an indictable offence nor the defendant's ignorance of the actual source of G
the "illicit/black money" is necessarily a valid mitigating factor…3
H H
I I
15. I accept there is no evidence showing that the defendant was
J J
involved in or had any knowledge of the investment scam against PW1. As
K the sole owner of the Account, the defendant should have retained its K
L ultimate control and paid attention to its transactions on a regular basis. On L
M the other hand, I cannot overlook the fact that a total sum of $2.8 million odd M
went through the Account within almost 1.5 months.
N N
O O
16. By lending her bank account to someone and thus allowing
P P
funds of unknown origins to pass through the Account, the defendant played
Q Q
a pivotal role in helping the mastermind(s) of criminal activities to access
R R
their illegal funds without revealing their identities.
S S
T T
3
Paragraph 44, p 114.
U U
V V
由此
- 7 -
A A
17. I consider a starting point of 3.5 years' imprisonment
B B
appropriate and just4. With the timely guilty plea, the sentence is reduced to
C C
28 months. Apart from this, I see no other mitigating factors which warrant
D D
any further reduction. With the 25% enhancement, I sentence the defendant
E E
to 35 months' imprisonment.
F F
G G
H (G. Lam) H
District Judge
I I
J J
K K
L L
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
4
According to Wan Kwok Keung (supra), the starting point is 3 years or so where the "black
T money" involved is between $1 million and $2 million; and 4 years or so, if between $3 million T
and $6 million. (See paragraph 15 of the judgment)
U U
V V