區域法院（刑事）Deputy District Judge Edward Wong19/1/2026[2026] HKDC 127
DCCC192/2025
A A
B B
DCCC 192/2025
C [2026] HKDC 127 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 192 OF 2025
F F
G ---------------------------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
v
I CHAN CHUN MING I
----------------------------------------------
J J
K Before: Deputy District Judge Edward Wong in Court K
Date: 20 January 2026
L L
Present: Ms Chan Yuk Lui Ivy, Public Prosecutor, for
M HKSAR/Director of Public Prosecutions M
Ms Lai Pui Ling Joyce, instructed by Deannie Yew and
N N
Associates, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the
O defendant O
Offences: [1] – [3] Dealing with property known or believed to represent
P P
proceeds of an indictable offence (處理已知道或相信為代
Q Q
表從可公訴罪行的得益的財產)
R R
---------------------------------------
S S
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
T --------------------------------------- T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
C A. Charges C
D D
1. The Defendant (“D”) pleaded guilty to 3 charges of dealing
E with property known or believed to represent proceeds of an indictable E
offence, contrary to s25(1) and (3) of the Organized and Serious Crimes
F F
Ordinance, Cap 455. The particulars are that he, in Hong Kong, knowing
G or having reasonable grounds to believe that property in bank accounts, in G
whole or in part directly or indirectly represented any person’s proceeds of
H H
an indictable offence, dealt with the said property. The other particulars are
I as follows: I
J J
Charges Dates Accounts Amount
K 1 1 August to 31 The Hongkong and HKD1,499,321.54 K
October 2022 Shanghai Banking
L L
Corporation Limited,
M account number 138- M
720669-833
N N
(“Account 1)
O 2 21 October to 3 Industrial and HKD1,067,777.06 O
November 2022 Commercial Bank of
P P
China (Asia) Limited,
Q account number 880- Q
R
823-18431-0 R
(“Account 2”)
S S
3 15 December Standard Chartered HKD1,678,880
T
2022 to 10 Bank (Hong Kong) and T
February 2023 Limited, account USD149,991.60
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
number 313-8-
C 516361-1 (“Account C
3”)
D D
E B. Facts E
F F
2. Pw1 to Pw3 were victims of fraud schemes. Pw1 was
G deceived to invest in forex through a bogus website, while Pw2, residing G
in the United States, and Pw3 were deceived by fraudsters, impersonating
H H
Mainland Chinese officials, that they were allegedly involved in criminal
I activities and that they had to provide funds to prove their innocence. The I
details of the losses of Pw1 to Pw3 and their remittances to Accounts 1 to
J J
3 as a result of the schemes are as follows:
K K
Remittance to Accounts 1 to 3
L Pw Account Total loss L
Date Amount
M M
Pw1 1 29 August 2022 HKD400,000 HKD3,100,000
N Pw2 2 2 November 2022 USD135,000 USD135,000 N
Pw3 3 10 January 2023 HKD238,000 HKD238,000
O O
P 3. Account 1 was opened in person by D with his HKID card on P
9 July 2022. It was stated in the opening form that he was a part-time
Q Q
decoration worker with a monthly income of around HKD10,000 to 14,999.
R R
4. According to the transaction records of Account 1:
S S
T (a) it was dormant with a zero balance from 9 to 31 July T
2022;
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
C (b) from 1 August to 31 October 2022, it had 16 deposits C
totalling HKD1,499,321.54 (including
D D
HKD763,709.54 converted from a deposit of
E CAD127,000) and 33 withdrawals totalling E
HKD1,495,858.29;
F F
G (c) most of the deposits were withdrawn from the account G
on the same day they were made, resulting in mirror
H H
patterns and consistently low daily balances; and
I I
(d) the account had a closing balance of HKD3,463.25 and
J J
has remained dormant since.
K K
5. Account 2 was opened in person by D with his HKID card on
L L
21 October 2022 and closed on 11 January 2023.
M M
6. According to the transaction records of Account 2:
N N
O (a) from 21 October to 3 November 2022, it had 3 deposits O
totalling HKD1,067,777.06 (including
P P
HKD1,057,777.06 converted from Pw2’s remittance of
Q USD134,992.30) and 8 withdrawals totalling Q
HKD1,067,878;
R R
S (b) most of the deposits were withdrawn from the account S
on the same day they were made, resulting in mirror
T T
patterns and consistently low daily balances; and
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
C (c) the account had a closing balance of HKD7.06 and has C
remained dormant since.
D D
E 7. Account 3 was opened in person by D with his HKID card on E
7 July 2022 and closed on 17 April 2023.
F F
G 8. According to the transaction records of Account 3: G
H H
(a) it was dormant with a zero balance from 7 July to 14
I December 2022; I
J J
(b) from 15 December 2022 to 10 February 2023, it had 16
K deposits totalling HKD1,678,880 and USD149,991.60 K
and 31 withdrawals totalling HKD2,300,380 and
L L
USD150,053.44;
M M
(c) most deposits were withdrawn on the same day they
N N
were made, resulting in mirror patterns and consistently
O low daily balances; and O
P P
(d) the account had a closing balance of HKD127.71 and
Q USD12.12 and has remained dormant since. Q
R R
9. He did not file any tax return for 2021/2022 and 2022/2023
S financial years. S
T T
10. At all material times:
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
C (a) D was in Hong Kong; C
D D
(b) he was the sole account holders and authorised
E signatories of Accounts 1 to 3; and E
F F
(c) he, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe
G that property, namely the monies deposited into G
Accounts 1 to 3, in whole or in part, directly or
H H
indirectly represented any person’s proceeds of an
I indictable offence, dealt with the said property. I
J J
C. Enhancement
K K
11. Prosecution (“P”) apply for enhancement of sentence under
L L
s27 of Cap. 455. Defence do not object and ask the Court to consider
M enhancing by 1/5 to 1/4 because the number of cases of this nature has M
recently decreased.
N N
O D. Criminal record O
P P
12. D committed 19 criminal cases with no similar offence.
Q Q
D. Mitigation
R R
S 13. D is aged 48 with Form 3 education. He was a part-time air- S
conditioner cleaner earning a monthly income of around HKD10,000, and
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
providing her mother with a monthly allowance of HKD4,000 to 5,000. He
C has been unemployed since the COVID-19 pandemic. C
D D
14. In around 2021, D was injured in a traffic accident and his
E back has suffered from pain since, requiring follow-up treatment at hospital E
every 6 months and medications on a regular basis.
F F
G 15. Defence cited HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] 5 HKLRD 536, G
Secretary for Justice v Wan Kwok Keung [2012] 1 HKLRD 201, and
H H
HKSAR v Boma [2012] 2 HKLRD 33.
I I
16. Regarding the present case, Defence submitted that:
J J
K (a) the Charges periods are not the longest and the amounts K
involved are not the highest for this kind of offence;
L L
M (b) no complexity was involved; M
N N
(c) there is no evidence of criminal organisation or of D’s
O knowledge of the predicate offences. O
P P
17. Defence ask the Court to consider a global starting point of
Q less than 5 years for all charges. Q
R R
E. P’s reply
S S
18. P submit that the Court may consider 4 to 4.5 years as the
T T
global starting point and an enhancement by 1/5 to 1/3.
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
C F. Sentence C
D D
19. I have also considered CAAR 4/2024 in which the Court of
E Appeal held the followings:1 E
F F
(a) Sentencing judges should keep firmly in mind the
G mischief targeted by the relevant legislation, and take G
note of the maximum penalty for the offence and the
H H
need for a deterrent sentence.
I I
(b) The amount involved is important but not the only
J J
factor. Wan Kwok Keung merely summarised the
K approximate sentencing ranges corresponding to the K
amounts in the cases listed by Hsu Yu Yi. Sentencing
L L
judges should not rely solely on those ranges, nor adopt
M a purely mathematical approach to sentencing without M
proper consideration of other case-specific factors.
N N
Judges must determine an appropriate term by assessing
O the particular circumstances of each case, drawing on O
their own sentencing experience, and their overall
P P
impression of the case.
Q Q
20. I have had regard to the following matters in the instant case:
R R
S S
T T
1
Para. 47-54.
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
(a) There is no evidence of sophisticated planning or steps,
C or criminal organisation. C
D D
(b) The predicate offences are online and telephone
E deceptions, but there is no evidence that D was aware E
of them.
F F
G (c) He was the holders of three stooge accounts. G
H H
(d) The periods of Charges 1 to 3 are 1 August to 31
I October 2022, 21 October to 3 November 2022, and 15 I
December 2022 to 10 February 2023, respectively.
J J
K (e) The amounts involved in Accounts 1 to 3 are (i) K
HKD1,499,321.54, (ii) HKD1,067,777.06, and (iii)
L L
HKD1,678,880 and USD149,991.60, respectively,
M totalling about HKD5,500,000. M
N N
(f) Account 1 had 16 deposits and 33 withdrawals,
O Account 2 had 3 deposits and 8 withdrawals, and O
Account 3 had 16 deposits and 31 withdrawals.
P P
Q (g) International element was involved as there were Q
deposits of CAD into Account 1 and USD into Account
R R
2 from Pw2 who resided in the United States.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
B B
C 21. A global starting point of 4 years 3 months (51 months) is C
appropriate. It is reduced by 1/3 for the guilty plea to 34 months.
D D
E 22. I allow the application for enhancement. An extent of 1/5 is E
appropriate because it has been the recent trend in District Court cases
F F
involving stooge accounts for money laundering: [2024] HKDC 256, [2024]
G HKDC 1634, [2025] HKDC 133, [2025] HKDC 1782, and [2025] HKDC G
2037.
H H
I 23. Hence, the global sentence is enhanced by 1/5 to 40 months. I
J J
24. In view of the above, the sentences are as follows:
K K
(a) The starting points for Charges 1 to 3 are 2.5 years (30
L L
months), 2 years (24 months), and 3.5 years (42
M months), respectively. M
N N
(b) They are reduced by 1/3 for the guilty plea to 20 months,
O 16 months, and 28 months, respectively. O
P P
(c) They are enhanced by 1/5 to 24 months, 19 months, and
Q 34 months, respectively. Q
R R
(d) To achieve the global sentence of 40 months, 4 months
S of the sentence of Charge 1 and 2 months of that of S
Charge 2 are to run consecutively to that of Charge 3,
T T
the rest of the sentences are to run concurrently.
U U
V V
- 11 -
A A
B B
C (e) Hence, D is sentenced to 40 months’ imprisonment for C
all charges.
D D
E E
F F
G G
( Edward Wong )
H Deputy District Judge 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
HKSAR v. CHAN CHUN MING
案件基本資料
案件名稱：HKSAR v Chan Chun Ming
法院：區域法院 (District Court)
法官：Edward Wong
判決日期：2026年1月20日
案情摘要
被告人 Chan Chun Ming 以其身份證件開設了三個銀行戶口（stooge accounts），被用於接收三名詐騙受害者的款項。受害者分別被誘騙投資外匯或被冒充中國官員恐嚇而匯款。該三個戶口在短時間內有大量資金進出，且呈現典型的「鏡像模式」（mirror patterns），即款項在存入當日即被提取，總金額約 550 萬港元。
核心法律爭議
本案的核心 legal issue 在於如何對處理代表可公訴罪行得益財產的行為進行 sentencing。控方申請根據 Cap 455 s27 增加刑期（enhancement）。辯方則主張被告並非犯罪組織成員，且對 predicate offences 並不知情，請求將 global starting point 定在 5 年以下。
### 案件基本資料
- 案件名稱：HKSAR v Chan Chun Ming
- 法院：區域法院 (District Court)
- 法官：Edward Wong
- 判決日期：2026年1月20日
### 案情摘要
被告人 Chan Chun Ming 以其身份證件開設了三個銀行戶口（stooge accounts），被用於接收三名詐騙受害者的款項。受害者分別被誘騙投資外匯或被冒充中國官員恐嚇而匯款。該三個戶口在短時間內有大量資金進出，且呈現典型的「鏡像模式」（mirror patterns），即款項在存入當日即被提取，總金額約 550 萬港元。
### 核心法律爭議
本案的核心 legal issue 在於如何對處理代表可公訴罪行得益財產的行為進行 sentencing。控方申請根據 Cap 455 s27 增加刑期（enhancement）。辯方則主張被告並非犯罪組織成員，且對 predicate offences 並不知情，請求將 global starting point 定在 5 年以下。
### 判決理由
法官在分析時參考了 CAAR 4/2024，強調 sentencing judge 應關注立法旨在打擊的 mischief 及 deterrent sentence 的必要性。法官認為雖然涉案金額重要，但不能僅採取數學計算法，而應綜合考慮個案因素。本案中，被告提供三個 stooge accounts 且涉及國際匯款，構成嚴重違法，但缺乏複雜計劃或組織證據。
### 引用案例與條文
引用 HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] 5 HKLRD 536, Secretary for Justice v Wan Kwok Keung [2012] 1 HKLRD 201 及 HKSAR v Boma [2012] 2 HKLRD 33 作為量刑參考；並引用 CAAR 4/2024 確立量刑原則，不應單純依賴金額範圍而忽略個案特徵。
### 裁決與命令
被告人對三項控罪均 mengaku guilty。法官設定 global starting point 為 51 個月，因 guilty plea 減少 1/3 至 34 個月，隨後根據近期趨勢增加 1/5 刑期。最終裁定被告所有控罪合併處以 40 個月監禁。
### 判決啟示
本案反映了法院對「傀儡戶口」（stooge accounts）洗黑錢案件採取嚴厲打擊的趨勢，即使被告並非主謀且對具體詐騙手段不知情，仍會被處以較重的刑罰以達到 deterrence 效果。
---
### 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 Chan Chun Ming
- Court: District Court
- Judge: Edward Wong
- Date of Judgment: 20 January 2026
### Factual Background
The defendant opened three bank accounts in his own name which were used as stooge accounts to receive funds from three fraud victims. The victims were deceived via bogus forex investments and impersonation scams. The accounts showed typical money laundering patterns, where deposits totaling approximately HKD 5.5 million were withdrawn almost immediately after receipt.
### Key Legal Issues
The primary legal issue concerned the appropriate sentence for dealing with property representing proceeds of an indictable offence. The prosecution sought sentence enhancement under s27 of Cap 455. The defence argued for a lower global starting point, citing the defendant's lack of involvement in a criminal organisation and lack of knowledge regarding the predicate offences.
### Ratio Decidendi
The judge applied the principles from CAAR 4/2024, emphasizing that sentencing should target the mischief of the legislation and provide sufficient deterrence. The judge ruled that while the amount involved is a key factor, a purely mathematical approach is insufficient. The court balanced the international element and the number of accounts against the lack of sophisticated planning.
### Key Precedents & Statutes
The court referred to HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010], Secretary for Justice v Wan Kwok Keung [2012], and HKSAR v Boma [2012] for sentencing ranges. CAAR 4/2024 was pivotal in guiding the judge to avoid a rigid mathematical approach and focus on the deterrent nature of the sentence.
### Decision & Orders
The defendant pleaded guilty to three charges. The judge set a global starting point of 51 months, reduced by 1/3 for the guilty plea to 34 months, and subsequently enhanced by 1/5. The final order was a global sentence of 40 months' imprisonment.
### Key Takeaways
The judgment underscores a judicial trend toward enhancing sentences for stooge account holders to deter money laundering, regardless of whether the individual played a lead role in the underlying fraud.
---
### 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.
A A
B B
DCCC 192/2025
C [2026] HKDC 127 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 192 OF 2025
F F
G ---------------------------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
v
I CHAN CHUN MING I
----------------------------------------------
J J
K Before: Deputy District Judge Edward Wong in Court K
Date: 20 January 2026
L L
Present: Ms Chan Yuk Lui Ivy, Public Prosecutor, for
M HKSAR/Director of Public Prosecutions M
Ms Lai Pui Ling Joyce, instructed by Deannie Yew and
N N
Associates, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the
O defendant O
Offences: [1] – [3] Dealing with property known or believed to represent
P P
proceeds of an indictable offence (處理已知道或相信為代
Q Q
表從可公訴罪行的得益的財產)
R R
---------------------------------------
S S
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
T --------------------------------------- T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
C A. Charges C
D D
1. The Defendant (“D”) pleaded guilty to 3 charges of dealing
E with property known or believed to represent proceeds of an indictable E
offence, contrary to s25(1) and (3) of the Organized and Serious Crimes
F F
Ordinance, Cap 455. The particulars are that he, in Hong Kong, knowing
G or having reasonable grounds to believe that property in bank accounts, in G
whole or in part directly or indirectly represented any person’s proceeds of
H H
an indictable offence, dealt with the said property. The other particulars are
I as follows: I
J J
Charges Dates Accounts Amount
K 1 1 August to 31 The Hongkong and HKD1,499,321.54 K
October 2022 Shanghai Banking
L L
Corporation Limited,
M account number 138- M
720669-833
N N
(“Account 1)
O 2 21 October to 3 Industrial and HKD1,067,777.06 O
November 2022 Commercial Bank of
P P
China (Asia) Limited,
Q account number 880- Q
R
823-18431-0 R
(“Account 2”)
S S
3 15 December Standard Chartered HKD1,678,880
T
2022 to 10 Bank (Hong Kong) and T
February 2023 Limited, account USD149,991.60
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
number 313-8-
C 516361-1 (“Account C
3”)
D D
E B. Facts E
F F
2. Pw1 to Pw3 were victims of fraud schemes. Pw1 was
G deceived to invest in forex through a bogus website, while Pw2, residing G
in the United States, and Pw3 were deceived by fraudsters, impersonating
H H
Mainland Chinese officials, that they were allegedly involved in criminal
I activities and that they had to provide funds to prove their innocence. The I
details of the losses of Pw1 to Pw3 and their remittances to Accounts 1 to
J J
3 as a result of the schemes are as follows:
K K
Remittance to Accounts 1 to 3
L Pw Account Total loss L
Date Amount
M M
Pw1 1 29 August 2022 HKD400,000 HKD3,100,000
N Pw2 2 2 November 2022 USD135,000 USD135,000 N
Pw3 3 10 January 2023 HKD238,000 HKD238,000
O O
P 3. Account 1 was opened in person by D with his HKID card on P
9 July 2022. It was stated in the opening form that he was a part-time
Q Q
decoration worker with a monthly income of around HKD10,000 to 14,999.
R R
4. According to the transaction records of Account 1:
S S
T (a) it was dormant with a zero balance from 9 to 31 July T
2022;
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
C (b) from 1 August to 31 October 2022, it had 16 deposits C
totalling HKD1,499,321.54 (including
D D
HKD763,709.54 converted from a deposit of
E CAD127,000) and 33 withdrawals totalling E
HKD1,495,858.29;
F F
G (c) most of the deposits were withdrawn from the account G
on the same day they were made, resulting in mirror
H H
patterns and consistently low daily balances; and
I I
(d) the account had a closing balance of HKD3,463.25 and
J J
has remained dormant since.
K K
5. Account 2 was opened in person by D with his HKID card on
L L
21 October 2022 and closed on 11 January 2023.
M M
6. According to the transaction records of Account 2:
N N
O (a) from 21 October to 3 November 2022, it had 3 deposits O
totalling HKD1,067,777.06 (including
P P
HKD1,057,777.06 converted from Pw2’s remittance of
Q USD134,992.30) and 8 withdrawals totalling Q
HKD1,067,878;
R R
S (b) most of the deposits were withdrawn from the account S
on the same day they were made, resulting in mirror
T T
patterns and consistently low daily balances; and
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
C (c) the account had a closing balance of HKD7.06 and has C
remained dormant since.
D D
E 7. Account 3 was opened in person by D with his HKID card on E
7 July 2022 and closed on 17 April 2023.
F F
G 8. According to the transaction records of Account 3: G
H H
(a) it was dormant with a zero balance from 7 July to 14
I December 2022; I
J J
(b) from 15 December 2022 to 10 February 2023, it had 16
K deposits totalling HKD1,678,880 and USD149,991.60 K
and 31 withdrawals totalling HKD2,300,380 and
L L
USD150,053.44;
M M
(c) most deposits were withdrawn on the same day they
N N
were made, resulting in mirror patterns and consistently
O low daily balances; and O
P P
(d) the account had a closing balance of HKD127.71 and
Q USD12.12 and has remained dormant since. Q
R R
9. He did not file any tax return for 2021/2022 and 2022/2023
S financial years. S
T T
10. At all material times:
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
C (a) D was in Hong Kong; C
D D
(b) he was the sole account holders and authorised
E signatories of Accounts 1 to 3; and E
F F
(c) he, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe
G that property, namely the monies deposited into G
Accounts 1 to 3, in whole or in part, directly or
H H
indirectly represented any person’s proceeds of an
I indictable offence, dealt with the said property. I
J J
C. Enhancement
K K
11. Prosecution (“P”) apply for enhancement of sentence under
L L
s27 of Cap. 455. Defence do not object and ask the Court to consider
M enhancing by 1/5 to 1/4 because the number of cases of this nature has M
recently decreased.
N N
O D. Criminal record O
P P
12. D committed 19 criminal cases with no similar offence.
Q Q
D. Mitigation
R R
S 13. D is aged 48 with Form 3 education. He was a part-time air- S
conditioner cleaner earning a monthly income of around HKD10,000, and
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
providing her mother with a monthly allowance of HKD4,000 to 5,000. He
C has been unemployed since the COVID-19 pandemic. C
D D
14. In around 2021, D was injured in a traffic accident and his
E back has suffered from pain since, requiring follow-up treatment at hospital E
every 6 months and medications on a regular basis.
F F
G 15. Defence cited HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] 5 HKLRD 536, G
Secretary for Justice v Wan Kwok Keung [2012] 1 HKLRD 201, and
H H
HKSAR v Boma [2012] 2 HKLRD 33.
I I
16. Regarding the present case, Defence submitted that:
J J
K (a) the Charges periods are not the longest and the amounts K
involved are not the highest for this kind of offence;
L L
M (b) no complexity was involved; M
N N
(c) there is no evidence of criminal organisation or of D’s
O knowledge of the predicate offences. O
P P
17. Defence ask the Court to consider a global starting point of
Q less than 5 years for all charges. Q
R R
E. P’s reply
S S
18. P submit that the Court may consider 4 to 4.5 years as the
T T
global starting point and an enhancement by 1/5 to 1/3.
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
C F. Sentence C
D D
19. I have also considered CAAR 4/2024 in which the Court of
E Appeal held the followings:1 E
F F
(a) Sentencing judges should keep firmly in mind the
G mischief targeted by the relevant legislation, and take G
note of the maximum penalty for the offence and the
H H
need for a deterrent sentence.
I I
(b) The amount involved is important but not the only
J J
factor. Wan Kwok Keung merely summarised the
K approximate sentencing ranges corresponding to the K
amounts in the cases listed by Hsu Yu Yi. Sentencing
L L
judges should not rely solely on those ranges, nor adopt
M a purely mathematical approach to sentencing without M
proper consideration of other case-specific factors.
N N
Judges must determine an appropriate term by assessing
O the particular circumstances of each case, drawing on O
their own sentencing experience, and their overall
P P
impression of the case.
Q Q
20. I have had regard to the following matters in the instant case:
R R
S S
T T
1
Para. 47-54.
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
(a) There is no evidence of sophisticated planning or steps,
C or criminal organisation. C
D D
(b) The predicate offences are online and telephone
E deceptions, but there is no evidence that D was aware E
of them.
F F
G (c) He was the holders of three stooge accounts. G
H H
(d) The periods of Charges 1 to 3 are 1 August to 31
I October 2022, 21 October to 3 November 2022, and 15 I
December 2022 to 10 February 2023, respectively.
J J
K (e) The amounts involved in Accounts 1 to 3 are (i) K
HKD1,499,321.54, (ii) HKD1,067,777.06, and (iii)
L L
HKD1,678,880 and USD149,991.60, respectively,
M totalling about HKD5,500,000. M
N N
(f) Account 1 had 16 deposits and 33 withdrawals,
O Account 2 had 3 deposits and 8 withdrawals, and O
Account 3 had 16 deposits and 31 withdrawals.
P P
Q (g) International element was involved as there were Q
deposits of CAD into Account 1 and USD into Account
R R
2 from Pw2 who resided in the United States.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
B B
C 21. A global starting point of 4 years 3 months (51 months) is C
appropriate. It is reduced by 1/3 for the guilty plea to 34 months.
D D
E 22. I allow the application for enhancement. An extent of 1/5 is E
appropriate because it has been the recent trend in District Court cases
F F
involving stooge accounts for money laundering: [2024] HKDC 256, [2024]
G HKDC 1634, [2025] HKDC 133, [2025] HKDC 1782, and [2025] HKDC G
2037.
H H
I 23. Hence, the global sentence is enhanced by 1/5 to 40 months. I
J J
24. In view of the above, the sentences are as follows:
K K
(a) The starting points for Charges 1 to 3 are 2.5 years (30
L L
months), 2 years (24 months), and 3.5 years (42
M months), respectively. M
N N
(b) They are reduced by 1/3 for the guilty plea to 20 months,
O 16 months, and 28 months, respectively. O
P P
(c) They are enhanced by 1/5 to 24 months, 19 months, and
Q 34 months, respectively. Q
R R
(d) To achieve the global sentence of 40 months, 4 months
S of the sentence of Charge 1 and 2 months of that of S
Charge 2 are to run consecutively to that of Charge 3,
T T
the rest of the sentences are to run concurrently.
U U
V V
- 11 -
A A
B B
C (e) Hence, D is sentenced to 40 months’ imprisonment for C
all charges.
D D
E E
F F
G G
( Edward Wong )
H Deputy District Judge 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