HCCC374/2024 HKSAR v. LEUNG YAU HO AND OTHERS - LawHero
HCCC374/2024
HKSAR v. LEUNG YAU HO AND OTHERS
高等法院（刑事）Andrew Chan J24/9/2025[2025] HKCFI 5544
HCCC374/2024
A HCCC 374/2024 A
[2025] HKCFI 5544
B IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE B
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
C C
CRIMINAL CASE NO 374 OF 2024
D ----------------- D
HKSAR
E E
v
F F
Leung Yau-ho (A1)
Mak Pui-i (A2)
G Wong Wai (A3) G
Chan Po-to (A4)
H ----------------- H
I
Before: Hon Andrew Chan J I
Date: 25 September 2025 at 10.15 am
Present: Mr Marcus Lee, SPP of the Department of Justice, for
J HKSAR J
Mr Cheung Kam-wing Adonis, instructed by Cheng & Ng,
assigned by DLA, for the 1st accused
K Offence: (1) Forcible detention of a person with intent to K
procure a ransom for liberation (將某人強行禁錮而意圖
L 取得用以交換釋放該人的贖金) L
(2) Robbery (搶劫罪) (against A1, A2, and A3)
M M
---------------------------------
Transcript of the Audio Recording
N of the Sentence in the above Case N
---------------------------------
O COURT: D1 has pleaded guilty to one count of forcible taking O
away or detention of a person with intent to procure a
ransom for his liberation, contrary to Section 42 of the
P P
Offences Against the Person Ordinance, and one count of
robbery, contrary to Section 10 of the Theft Ordinance. He
Q is committed to this court for sentence. Q
The Summary of Facts reveal the following. The victim and
R D2 have been friends for over 10 years. On 1 September R
2021, the victim received a call from D2 whom he fancied to
be his girlfriend. D2 indicated that she had been short of
S S
money, broken up with her boyfriend and could have sex with
the victim. The victim then went to Bell House, a building
T in Yau Ma Tei, to meet D2. T
Upon arrival at the corridor on the 7th floor, the victim
U was then pushed into a room of one hostel. He was assaulted U
CRT23/25.9.2025/JC 1 HCCC 374/2024(2)/Sentence
V V
A by D1 and D3 repeatedly. In the course of the attack, D3 A
even used a baseball bat to strike the victim. The victim
was then taken to Room 9 of the hostel. Inside that room,
B the victim was tied up, blindfolded, and kicked and stepped B
on his head by the gang. Bank cards, mobile phones, and
3,500 cash were taken away. That formed the subject matters
C C
of the robbery charge. D3 also demanded passwords from the
victim for the online and telephone banking, ATM cards, and
D Alipay accounts. The victim succumbed under pressure. D
Attempts were made to withdraw money from the victim’s bank
E accounts but unsuccessfully. Allegations of D2 being raped E
by the victim and debt being owed, which were denied, had
been made to the victim. Upon his denial, the victim was
F F
further assaulted. Later on, negotiation as to the amount
of repayment money for his release had taken place between
G the parties. As a result, the victim stated that he could G
obtain $40,000 from his family. The victim then called up
his aunt. After an agreement had been reached, D4 removed
H the blindfold and untied the victim. H
I
When D1 and D4 met up with the victim’s family member with a I
view to collect the $40,000, they were arrested by the
police.
J J
D1 is now 41, educated up to Form 3 level. Prior to his
arrest he was a delivery worker making $15,000 a month. He
K has 18 criminal records involving multiple offences, but K
none related to the present two offences.
L L
Both offences are serious offences with a maximum sentence
for life imprisonment. In HKSAR v KAN Chan-hung and
M Another, CACC 489/2002, it was held that section 42 of the M
Offence Against the Person Ordinance was a very serious one
and warranted a severe deterrent sentence. The maximum was
N life imprisonment and the minimum was no less than 8 years’ N
imprisonment.
O O
In this case, violence had been inflicted onto the victim.
He was blindfolded and tied up. Luckily he did not sustain
P any serious injuries. The notable injuries were lacerations P
on his face near his right eye.
Q Q
Although the ransom money demanded for the victim’s release
was not substantial, the mean in demanding repayment should
R be deterred. The commission of such offence nevertheless R
should not be encouraged. The plan was to lure the victim
into coming to the hostel. It was a carefully orchestrated
S plan. I accept the period of time for the victim’s S
detention was not substantial.
T T
After a careful consideration of all the circumstances,
12 years’ imprisonment will be adopted as the starting
U point. In this case, apart from the defendant’s plea, I U
CRT23/25.9.2025/JC 2 HCCC 374/2024(2)/Sentence
V V
A don’t see any other mitigating factor. As such, a one-third A
discount will be given. For the 1st count, the defendant is
sentenced to 8 years’ imprisonment.
B B
As to the 2nd count of robbery, this was also a serious
robbery involving the use of violence with a weapon, ie a
C C
baseball bat. Violence was inflicted before the robbery.
Further violence was also inflicted after the robbery when
D the ATM card could not be used to withdraw money. Wild D
allegations had been made and the victim was blindfolded and
tied up at the time. He was assaulted by a gang of multiple
E persons. No doubt, the victim was terrified. E
Having considered the circumstances of the case, a starting
F F
point for Count 2 would be set at 9 years’ imprisonment. A
one-third discount will be given for D1. As such, he is
G sentenced to 6 years’ imprisonment. G
Having considered the totality principle, in respect of the
H 2nd count, 2 years of Count 2 is ordered to run H
consecutively to the 8 years imposed on Count 1.
I I
For the two counts of offences D1 stands convicted, he is
therefore sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment.
J J
K K
I/we certify that to the best of my/our ability
and skill, the foregoing is a true transcript of
L the audio recording of the above proceedings L
M M
.........................................
Jeremiah Barcena Castro
N Date: 30 September 2025 N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
CRT23/25.9.2025/JC 3 HCCC 374/2024(2)/Sentence
V V
A HCCC 374/2024 A
[2025] HKCFI 5544
B IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE B
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
C C
CRIMINAL CASE NO 374 OF 2024
D ----------------- D
HKSAR
E E
v
F F
Leung Yau-ho (A1)
Mak Pui-i (A2)
G Wong Wai (A3) G
Chan Po-to (A4)
H ----------------- H
I
Before: Hon Andrew Chan J I
Date: 25 September 2025 at 10.15 am
Present: Mr Marcus Lee, SPP of the Department of Justice, for
J HKSAR J
Mr Cheung Kam-wing Adonis, instructed by Cheng & Ng,
assigned by DLA, for the 1st accused
K Offence: (1) Forcible detention of a person with intent to K
procure a ransom for liberation (將某人強行禁錮而意圖
L 取得用以交換釋放該人的贖金) L
(2) Robbery (搶劫罪) (against A1, A2, and A3)
M M
---------------------------------
Transcript of the Audio Recording
N of the Sentence in the above Case N
---------------------------------
O COURT: D1 has pleaded guilty to one count of forcible taking O
away or detention of a person with intent to procure a
ransom for his liberation, contrary to Section 42 of the
P P
Offences Against the Person Ordinance, and one count of
robbery, contrary to Section 10 of the Theft Ordinance. He
Q is committed to this court for sentence. Q
The Summary of Facts reveal the following. The victim and
R D2 have been friends for over 10 years. On 1 September R
2021, the victim received a call from D2 whom he fancied to
be his girlfriend. D2 indicated that she had been short of
S S
money, broken up with her boyfriend and could have sex with
the victim. The victim then went to Bell House, a building
T in Yau Ma Tei, to meet D2. T
Upon arrival at the corridor on the 7th floor, the victim
U was then pushed into a room of one hostel. He was assaulted U
CRT23/25.9.2025/JC 1 HCCC 374/2024(2)/Sentence
V V
A by D1 and D3 repeatedly. In the course of the attack, D3 A
even used a baseball bat to strike the victim. The victim
was then taken to Room 9 of the hostel. Inside that room,
B the victim was tied up, blindfolded, and kicked and stepped B
on his head by the gang. Bank cards, mobile phones, and
3,500 cash were taken away. That formed the subject matters
C C
of the robbery charge. D3 also demanded passwords from the
victim for the online and telephone banking, ATM cards, and
D Alipay accounts. The victim succumbed under pressure. D
Attempts were made to withdraw money from the victim’s bank
E accounts but unsuccessfully. Allegations of D2 being raped E
by the victim and debt being owed, which were denied, had
been made to the victim. Upon his denial, the victim was
F F
further assaulted. Later on, negotiation as to the amount
of repayment money for his release had taken place between
G the parties. As a result, the victim stated that he could G
obtain $40,000 from his family. The victim then called up
his aunt. After an agreement had been reached, D4 removed
H the blindfold and untied the victim. H
I
When D1 and D4 met up with the victim’s family member with a I
view to collect the $40,000, they were arrested by the
police.
J J
D1 is now 41, educated up to Form 3 level. Prior to his
arrest he was a delivery worker making $15,000 a month. He
K has 18 criminal records involving multiple offences, but K
none related to the present two offences.
L L
Both offences are serious offences with a maximum sentence
for life imprisonment. In HKSAR v KAN Chan-hung and
M Another, CACC 489/2002, it was held that section 42 of the M
Offence Against the Person Ordinance was a very serious one
and warranted a severe deterrent sentence. The maximum was
N life imprisonment and the minimum was no less than 8 years’ N
imprisonment.
O O
In this case, violence had been inflicted onto the victim.
He was blindfolded and tied up. Luckily he did not sustain
P any serious injuries. The notable injuries were lacerations P
on his face near his right eye.
Q Q
Although the ransom money demanded for the victim’s release
was not substantial, the mean in demanding repayment should
R be deterred. The commission of such offence nevertheless R
should not be encouraged. The plan was to lure the victim
into coming to the hostel. It was a carefully orchestrated
S plan. I accept the period of time for the victim’s S
detention was not substantial.
T T
After a careful consideration of all the circumstances,
12 years’ imprisonment will be adopted as the starting
U point. In this case, apart from the defendant’s plea, I U
CRT23/25.9.2025/JC 2 HCCC 374/2024(2)/Sentence
V V
A don’t see any other mitigating factor. As such, a one-third A
discount will be given. For the 1st count, the defendant is
sentenced to 8 years’ imprisonment.
B B
As to the 2nd count of robbery, this was also a serious
robbery involving the use of violence with a weapon, ie a
C C
baseball bat. Violence was inflicted before the robbery.
Further violence was also inflicted after the robbery when
D the ATM card could not be used to withdraw money. Wild D
allegations had been made and the victim was blindfolded and
tied up at the time. He was assaulted by a gang of multiple
E persons. No doubt, the victim was terrified. E
Having considered the circumstances of the case, a starting
F F
point for Count 2 would be set at 9 years’ imprisonment. A
one-third discount will be given for D1. As such, he is
G sentenced to 6 years’ imprisonment. G
Having considered the totality principle, in respect of the
H 2nd count, 2 years of Count 2 is ordered to run H
consecutively to the 8 years imposed on Count 1.
I I
For the two counts of offences D1 stands convicted, he is
therefore sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment.
J J
K K
I/we certify that to the best of my/our ability
and skill, the foregoing is a true transcript of
L the audio recording of the above proceedings L
M M
.........................................
Jeremiah Barcena Castro
N Date: 30 September 2025 N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
CRT23/25.9.2025/JC 3 HCCC 374/2024(2)/Sentence
V V