A A
B B
DCCC 566/2024
C [2025] HKDC 1310 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 566 OF 2024
F F
G ---------------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
v
I CHAN YIN LUN (D1) I
POON KA MAN (D2)
J J
----------------------------------
K K
Before: His Honour Judge Tam
L L
Date: 31 July 2025
M Present: Mr Chu Ka Shing, Jonathan, Senior Public Prosecutor (Ag), M
for HKSAR
N N
Mr Wong Shun Yin, Terry, instructed by Adrian Yeung &
O Cheng, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the 1 st O
defendant
P P
Ms Leung Wan Chong, Christine, instructed by Ngans
Q Lawyers LLP, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Q
2nd defendant
R R
Offences: [1]-[3] Dealing with property known or believed to
S represent proceeds of an indictable offence（處理已知道或 S
T 相信為代表從可公訴罪行的得益的財產） - D1 T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
[4]-[6] Dealing with property known or believed to
C represent proceeds of an indictable offence（處理已知道或 C
相信為代表從可公訴罪行的得益的財產） - D2
D D
E ----------------------------------------- E
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
F F
-----------------------------------------
G G
1. D1 and D2 face a Charge Sheet consisting of a total of 6
H H
charges of Dealing with property known or believed to represent proceeds
I I
of an indictable offence, contrary to section 25(1) and (3) of the Organized
J
and Serious Crimes Ordinance, Cap 455. J
K K
2. Charges 1 to 3 are preferred against D1. Charges 4 to 6 are
L
preferred against D2. L
M M
3. D1 pleaded guilty to Charges 1 to 3. D2 pleaded guilty to
N Charges 4 to 6. N
O O
4. Particulars of Charges 1 to 3 are that D1, between A(1) and
P A(2), both dates inclusive, in Hong Kong, together with a male surnamed P
“Leung”, a female known as “Man Man” and other unknown persons,
Q Q
knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe that property namely a
R total sum of B Hong Kong currency in the bank account with C, account R
number D, in whole or in part directly or indirectly represented any
S S
person’s proceeds of an indictable offence, dealt with the said property.
T T
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
5. For Charge 1, A(1) is 14 February 2023; A(2) is 23 February
C 2023; B is $2,691,046.65; C is Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) C
Limited; D is 578-8-719590-1.
D D
E 6. For Charge 2, A(1) is 8 February 2023; A(2) is 25 February E
2023; B is $2,300,285; C is The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking
F F
Corporation Limited; D is 829-625474-833.
G G
7. For Charge 3, A(1) is 8 February 2023; A(2) is 22 February
H H
2023; B is $3,337,511; C is Bank of China (Hong Kong) Limited; D is 012-
I 792-2-027177-4. I
J J
8. Particulars of Charge 4 are that D2, between 30 January 2023
K and 20 February 2023, both dates inclusive, in Hong Kong, together with K
other unknown persons, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe
L L
that property namely a total sum of $2,550,256 Hong Kong currency in the
M bank account with Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) Limited, M
account number 570-1-963958-6, in whole or in part directly or indirectly
N N
represented any person’s proceeds of an indictable offence, dealth with the
O said property. O
P P
9. Particulars of Charges 5 to 6 are that D2, between E(1) and
Q E(2), both dates inclusive, in Hong Kong, knowing or having reasonable Q
grounds to believe that property namely a total sum of F Hong Kong
R R
currency in the bank account with G, account number H, in whole or in
S part directly or indirectly represented any person’s proceeds of an S
indictable offence, dealth with the said property.
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
10. For Charge 5, E(1) is 30 January 2023; E(2) is 24 February
C 2023; F is $3,968,644.5; G is The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking C
Corporation Limited; H is 166-859801-833.
D D
E 11. For Charge 6, E(1) is 16 February 2023; E(2) is 22 February E
2023; F is $8,149,037.01; G is Bank of China (Hong Kong) Limited; H is
F F
012-352-1-030789-0.
G G
Facts admitted by D1 and D2
H H
I 12. Between January and February 2023, PW1 to PW21 fell I
victim to similar investment frauds. In general, they were lured by
J J
swindlers, who approached them via social media, to invest in
K cryptocurrency on bogus online platform/website with insider K
information/promising return. As a result, these victims were deceived to
L L
transfer their funds to various designated accounts provided by the
M swindlers or the platform(s)/website(s), amongst which a total of M
HKD2,371,376 were made to A/C-1 to A/C-6 (defined below) from 16 to
N N
24 February 2023. Scams were unveiled when these victims were unable
O to withdraw their money. Cases were reported. O
P P
13. At the material times, D1 was the holder and sole account
Q signatory of the following 3 bank accounts:- Q
R R
(a) A bank account numbered 578-8-719590-1 held with
S Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) limited (“SCB”) S
(“A/C-1”);
T T
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
(b) A bank account numbered 829-625474-833 held with
C The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation C
Limited (“HSBC”) (“A/C-2”); and
D D
E (c) A bank account numbered 012-792-2-027177-4 held E
with Bank of China (Hong Kong) Limited (“BoC”)
F F
(“A/C-3”).
G G
D1’s SCB Account (A/C-1)
H H
I 14. A/C-1 was opened by D1 on 7 February 2018. D1 was the I
sole signatory. His reported income was HK$13,000. Statement was
J J
mailed to his residence in Tseung Kwan O.
K K
15. From September 2018 onwards, A/C-1 basically became idle
L L
until 14 February 2023 when A/C-1 was started to be used again.
M M
16. Between 14 and 23 February 2023, there were 81 deposits
N N
(HK$2,691,046.65) and 33 withdrawals (HK$2,638,491). There was a
O remaining balance of HK$52,539.44 after A/C-1 had no further O
transactions on 23 February 2023.
P P
Q D1’s HSBC Account (A/C-2) Q
R R
17. A/C-2 was opened by D1 on 8 February 2023. D1 was the
S sole signatory. He claimed to be unemployed and did not receive any S
social security. He left his residential address in Tseung Kwan O as
T T
correspondence address.
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
C 18. Between 8 and 25 February 2023, there were 29 deposits C
(HK$2,300,285) and 60 withdrawals (HK$2,300,238). There was a
D D
remaining balance of HK$47 after A/C-2 had no further transactions on 25
E February 2023. E
F F
D1’s BoC Account (A/C-3)
G G
19. A/C-3 was opened by D1 on 8 February 2023 and closed on
H H
13 March 2023. D1 was the sole signatory. He claimed to be unemployed.
I He left his residential address in Tseung Kwan O as correspondence I
address.
J J
K 20. Between 20 and 22 February 2023, there were 66 deposits K
(HK$3,337,511) and 81 withdrawals (HK$3,283,797.51). There was a
L L
remaining balance of HK$53,713.49 after A/C-3 had no further
M transactions on 22 February 2023. That amount (plus two entries of further M
interest) was withdrawn on 13 March 2023 when A/C-3 was closed.
N N
O 21. At the material times, D2 was the holder and sole account O
signatory of the following 3 bank accounts:-
P P
Q (a) A bank account numbered 570-1-963958-6 held with Q
SCB (“A/C-4”);
R R
S (b) A bank account numbered 166-859801-833 held with S
HSBC (“A/C-5”); and
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
(c) A bank account numbered 012-352-1-030789-0 held
C with BoC (“A/C-6”). C
D D
D2’s SCB Account (A/C-4)
E E
22. A/C-4 was opened by D2 on 30 January 2023. D2 was the
F F
sole signatory. He claimed to be a clerk earning HK$10,000 per month.
G He left his residential address in Tin Shui Wai as correspondence address G
to receive bank statements.
H H
I 23. The first transaction was a cash deposit of HK$3,000 on 30 I
January 2023. Then, there was a test deposit of HK$1 and withdrawal of
J J
HK$1 on 14 February 2023, followed by a cash withdrawal of HK$3,000
K on the same day. K
L L
24. A/C-4 became more active between 16 and 20 February 2023.
M In that period, there were 75 deposits (HK$2,547,255) and 65 withdrawals M
(HK$2,546,353.06). There was a remaining balance of HK$902.74 after
N N
A/C-4 had no further transactions on 20 February 2023.
O O
D2’s HSBC Account (A/C-5)
P P
Q 25. A/C-5 was opened by D2 on 30 January 2023. D2 was the Q
sole signatory. He claimed to be a part-time salesman earning
R R
HK$120,000 per year. He left his residential address in Tin Shui Wai as
S correspondence address. S
T T
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
26. The first transaction was a cash deposit of HK$100 on 13
C February 2023. C
D D
27. A/C-5 became more active between 17 and 24 February 2023.
E In that period, there were 68 deposits (HK$3,968,544.5) and 107 E
withdrawals (HK$3,968,613.9). There was a remaining balance of
F F
HK$30.6 after A/C-5 had no further transactions on 24 February 2023.
G G
D2’s BoC Account (A/C-6)
H H
I 28. A/C-6 was opened by D2 on 15 March 2013 and closed on 6 I
March 2023. D2 was the sole signatory. He claimed to be unemployed.
J J
He changed his correspondence address to his residential address in Tin
K Shui Wai on 15 February 2018. K
L L
29. Up until 6 February 2023, the use of A/C-6 appeared to be
M normal, and the amount of funds and transactions transacted through A/C- M
6 were not suspiciously large. It is noted that the last transaction before 16
N N
February 2023 was on 6 February 2023, to which there was a withdrawal
O of HK$3,800, making the balance to a minimal level of HK$24.54. O
P P
30. Between 16 and 22 February 2023, there were 150 deposits
Q (HK$8,149,037.01) and 137 withdrawals (HK$8,149,053.83). There was Q
a remaining balance of HK$7.72 after A/C-6 had no further transactions on
R R
22 February 2023.
S S
T T
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
Arrest of D1
C C
31. On 7 March 2023, D1 attended a police station, reporting that
D D
he was recruited by his secondary schoolmate surnamed LEUNG to work
E in marketing for quick money, but then he was kept by a group of people E
in hotels whilst surrendering his bank accounts. Upon police investigation,
F F
D1 eventually revealed that he was in fact told by LEUNG to surrender his
G accounts for collecting soccer bets. D1 was arrested. Under caution, D1 G
admitted that LEUNG asked him to give away his three bank accounts (ie
H H
A/C-1, A/C-2 and A/C-3) to collect soccer bets, and D1 would be rewarded
I HK$10,000 per day. In a subsequent video-recorded interview (VRI), D1 I
said under caution that:-
J J
K (a) He worked as a part-time decoration project assistant, K
making HK$15,000 per month.
L L
M (b) He acquainted LEUNG from secondary school, but M
since Form 3, LEUNG dropped out of school, and they
N N
had less contact until February 2023, when LEUNG
O introduced him a job to earn quick money. LEUNG O
said he started to do improper and suspicious jobs, and
P P
LEUNG asked him to recruit people to do parcel
Q delivery jobs. However, he did not know what those Q
parcels would contain, so he didn’t accept LEUNG’s
R R
job offer.
S S
(c) Later, LEUNG told him that there was another job that
T T
was to reside at a hotel and to provide bank accounts to
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
B B
receive illegal soccer bets. He learned that there would
C be around HK$100,000 of soccer bets being laundered C
through his accounts. He agreed to the job.
D D
E (d) He was then referred by LEUNG to an unknown female E
called Man Man on WhatsApp, who asked him to
F F
provide three accounts to the syndicate from either BoC,
G SCB, HSBC or HSB. Since he only had an HSB, he G
went to open BoC and HSBC accounts on 8 February
H H
2023. He had not seen Man Man before.
I I
(e) He was also asked to stay in a hotel room when his
J J
accounts were being used to launder illegal funds. He
K would be rewarded HK$10,000 per night (Saturday and K
Sunday would be counted as one night). He was
L L
promised to be rewarded HK$45,000 for staying 8
M nights (the first night not counted as no transaction M
would be done) as LEUNG would collect HK$60,000
N N
from the boss. During the stay at the hotel, he could
O not use his phone. O
P P
(f) Subsequently, he continued to chat with Man Man on
Q Telegram in a group called “Group 102”. There were Q
4-5 persons in that group, whom he did not know of.
R R
He provided his bank accounts details, his personal
S details (HKID card and proof of residence) to persons S
in this group.
T T
U U
V V
- 11 -
A A
B B
(g) He started to stay in a hotel on 19 February 2023. He
C was asked by someone called Ah Chuen to go to North C
Point MTR station at around 9 pm that day. Ah Chuen
D D
also told him that someone called Ah J would come to
E pick him up to go to the hotel, ie Hotel Plaza North E
Point. Ah J was the person serving as security guard
F F
guarding him at the hotel.
G G
(h) He met with Ah J at North Point MTR station, and they
H H
went to Hotel Plaza North Point. Ah J also asked him
I to give away the three ATM cards as well as his own I
mobile phone to Ah J, as they did not want him to use
J J
the phone that might affect the account record. At
K around 11 pm at the hotel lobby, he further met with K
another person called Ah Lung, who was another
L L
security guard. Then, Ah Lung took him to Room 2812
M in the hotel, where there were 3 persons, ie two security M
guards and a person (later known to be D2) who was
N N
also lending bank accounts for rewards.
O O
(i) He could not leave the hotel room, so the security
P P
guards would go out to buy takeaway for him and D2.
Q He stayed in Room 2812 until 22 February 2023. On Q
that day, two persons called Ah Bak and Ah Shui came
R R
to Room 2812. Ah Shui asked him for his HKID card
S to book another room, so he went with Ah Shui to check S
in another room. The hotel initially gave them a room
T T
U U
V V
- 12 -
A A
B B
on 30th floor, but later the hotel manager asked them to
C leave as they smoked in Room 2812. C
D D
(j) As such, the group of seven (including D1 & D2) left,
E and they went to a McDonald’s to wait for Ah J to book E
another hotel. Later, the group went to Kowloon
F F
Harbourfront Hotel in Hung Hom. Again, the group
G used his name to reserve a hotel room (Room 518). G
H H
(k) At around 9 pm on 22 February 2023, a female
I (referred to as “F1”) came to Room 518, who was also I
someone lending bank accounts for rewards. Since
J J
Room 518 could not allow too many people to stay, F1
K reserved another room (Room 512) in her name for her K
to stay.
L L
M (l) During the stay at the Hung Hom hotel, they changed M
to different rooms for different nights. Eventually, he
N N
left on 25 February 2023. The persons guarding him at
O first took him to a restaurant at Whampoa for lunch, as O
they needed to wait for the boss to clarify with certain
P P
matters concerning his bank accounts.
Q Q
(m) Whilst leaving, he called LEUNG as to his promised
R R
reward. LEUNG told him that the boss might not pay
S him, as he did not stay in hotel for 8 nights. At night, S
he checked his BoC and SCB accounts to find
T T
HK$50,000 each. LEUNG and Man Man told him to
U U
V V
- 13 -
A A
B B
transfer out those money, and he did so by mobile
C phone but failed. He tried again by cash withdrawal, C
but again failed.
D D
E (n) On 1 March 2023, LEUNG called him, telling him to E
go to SCB the next day as someone would assist him to
F F
withdraw money. Next day, he received a call from
G someone unknown, who claimed to assist him to cancel G
the bank accounts. That person never showed up, but
H H
that person asked him to walk inside the bank to handle
I account termination. However, the bank staff said the I
account could not be terminated at that time. Similarly,
J J
when LEUNG asked him to cancel the BoC account, he
K did as instructed but the account could not be cancelled. K
L L
(o) Most of his WhatsApp messages with LEUNG and
M Man Man were deleted, except some that he had M
discussed the job with Man Man.
N N
O (p) He was scared at first when he reported the case to O
police so he said he was detained by the syndicate, but
P P
later he wished to tell the whole truth to avoid any
Q misleading of police. Q
R R
32. In another cautioned VRI, D1 explained the WhatsApp
S messages with LEUNG and Man Man that he had kept from deleting as S
told by LEUNG, as he thought the deleting of those messages would not
T T
protect him but only to protect LEUNG. In those messages, LEUNG and
U U
V V
- 14 -
A A
B B
Man Man explained the job details of lending bank accounts to earn money,
C and that there were money left in his accounts after the syndicate had used C
them, so D1 was required to transfer them to LEUNG first.
D D
E Arrest of D2 E
F F
33. On 8 March 2023, D2 was arrested.
G G
34. On 15 May 2023, another team of police officers arrested D2
H H
at his public housing residence in Tin Shui Wai regarding his A/C-4
I receiving funds of PW1. Under caution, D2 said that he sold his A/C-4 to I
others. In subsequent cautioned VRI, D2 said that:-
J J
K (a) He was unemployed, and had worked as a construction K
worker about 2 months ago at a monthly wage of about
L L
HK$20,000. He had not filed any tax returns, nor did
M he own any vehicle or property; and he was not a M
director or shareholder of any company.
N N
O (b) He did not know PW1. O
P P
(c) He opened A/C-4 a few months ago for lending it to a
Q friend (M1) introduced by someone called Ah Chi for Q
receiving remittances at a reward of HK$12,000. He
R R
passed the online banking password to M1 after the
S account was opened. S
T T
U U
V V
- 15 -
A A
B B
(d) He was asked to stay in a hotel for 7 days and was not
C allowed to use his phone during the period. However, C
he did not receive the promised reward.
D D
E (e) He knew Ah Chi in a cyber café in 2015, and Ah Chi E
introduced M1 to him a few months ago. M1 asked him
F F
to open a Standard Chartered Bank account, but he was
G not very familiar with M1 and did not know M1’s name. G
H H
Examination of accounts
I I
35. In the examined period for each of A/C-1 to A/C-6, the
J J
transaction records exhibited money laundering hallmarks, including the
K use of test deposit of a small amount, large amount of transactions, low K
bank balance at the end of each transaction day, quick speed of fund
L L
dissipation, mirror pattern of aggregate amounts of deposits and
M withdrawals, and incommensurability of funds deposits. M
N N
Criminal records
O O
36. D1 has a previous clear record.
P P
Q 37. D2 has a previous clear record. Q
R R
Antecedents
S S
38. D1 is aged 28 (26 at the time of the offences), educated to F6
T T
level. He has been working as a Stage Lighting Technician since 2022
U U
V V
- 16 -
A A
B B
with a monthly salary of about $15,000. D1 lives in private housing in
C Tseung Kwan O with his parents, elder brother and elder sister. C
D D
39. D2 is aged 30 (27 at the time of the offences), educated to F3
E level. D2 has worked as a part-time waiter in restaurants. D2 lives in E
public housing in Tin Shui Wai.
F F
G Mitigation G
H H
D1
I I
40. Mr Terry Wong of counsel assigned by the Director of Legal
J J
Aid mitigated on behalf of D1. The following is a summary of the
K mitigation submissions. K
L L
41. D1 is a hardworking person, and has a kind heart in the eyes
M of his family. M
N N
42. Charge 1 spanned 10 days. There were 81 deposits (almost
O $2.7 million) and 33 withdrawals ($2.64 million) O
P P
43. Charge 2 spanned 18 days. There were 29 deposits ($2.3
Q million) and 60 withdrawals ($2.3 million). Q
R R
44. Charge 3 spanned 15 days. There were 66 deposits ($3.34
S million) and 81 withdrawals ($3.28 million). S
T T
U U
V V
- 17 -
A A
B B
45. There is no sentencing guideline for money laundering.
C Usually, the main consideration is the amount of “black money” involved. C
D D
46. In HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] 5 HKLRD 545, the Court of
E Appeal emphasized that the amount of money is a major sentencing E
consideration. Cheung JA, in giving the judgment of the court, also had
F F
the following observations at paragraph 9:
G G
“9. There are no sentencing guidelines for the offence of
H dealing with the proceeds from an indictable offence because the H
facts vary from case to case. However the following factors are
to be taken into account when determining sentence:
I I
(a) It is the amount of money involved that is a major
J consideration and not the amount of benefit J
received by a defendant in the transaction.
K (b) The culpability of the offence lies in the K
assistance, support and encouragement offered to
the commission of an indictable offence. So a
L L
defendant’s level of participation and the number
of occasions on which he is involved in the
M “money laundering” activities are relevant M
factors to be considered.
N (c) The offence of dealing with the proceeds from an N
indictable offence does not necessarily have any
O direct correlation with the indictable offence in O
question. However if the relevant indictable
offence can be identified, the court may take into
P account the sentence imposed on the indictable P
offence per se when determining the sentence of
Q
the dealing offence. Q
(d) If the case has an international element involving
R activities carried out across different regions, the R
court may impose a more severe sentence. This
is to protect Hong Kong’s reputation as an
S S
international finance and banking hub from being
tarnished.
T T
(e) The length of time the offence lasted.”
U U
V V
- 18 -
A A
B B
47. In Secretary for Justice v Wan Kwok Keung [2012] 1 HKLRD
C 201, Yeung JA (as he then was) observed that: C
D D
“12. “Money laundering” is a serious offence for not only
does it encourage criminal activities indirectly, but also attempts
E to legitimise the proceeds of crime. In order to crack down on E
serious crimes and to prevent offenders from getting financial
gains, it is necessary to deter the commission of “money
F laundering” offences (see Court of Appeal in HKSAR v Javid F
Kamran (unrep., CACC 400/2004, [2005] HKEC 80), HKSAR v
G Xu Xia Li [2004] 4 HKC 16). G
13. Generally, the sentence for a “money laundering”
H offence should mainly reflect the amount of “black money” H
laundered and not the benefit obtained by the defendant or others.
The reason being that it is very difficult to prove the benefit
I I
concerned, and in most “money laundering” cases, there may not
be evidence to show from what indictable offence the “black
J money” is in fact derived. Of course if there is information to J
prove that the “black money” originated from serious crimes,
including drug trafficking, kidnap and blackmail, illegal human
K trafficking and other organised crimes etc, or the defendant’s K
benefit is huge, then the sentence should be adjusted upward.
L L
14. This Court has, in a number of other similar cases, also
listed other factors relevant to the sentence to be imposed
M including the number of offences, the length of time the offence M
lasted, the degree to which the defendant participated in the
N
offence involving “black money” and whether or not it was an N
organised and sophisticated crime etc.
O 15. In HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] 5 HKLRD 545, Cheung O
JA set out the amounts of money involved and the sentences
passed in a number of “money laundering” cases. The
P P
sentencing starting point is 3 years or so where the “black money”
involved is between $1 million and $2 million; 4 years or so
Q where it is between $3 million and $6 million; and could be over Q
5 years where it is above $10 million.
R 16. The “black money” in this case was from illegal R
bookmaking on soccer gambling and not from a particularly
S serious crime, and the respondent’s offences, including his S
bookmaking offence, were not well organised either. According
to the respondent’s confession, the amount of money that he had
T received from the offence was not huge, it was not over T
$150,000. This Court agrees that where the offence of “money
laundering” is concerned, this case is not a very serious one.
U U
V V
- 19 -
A A
B B
17. However, this Court cannot ignore the fact that the
C respondent had “laundered money” on thousands of occasions C
for as long as seven years and the total amount involved was as
high as $14 million. And neither can this Court ignore the fact
D that the “black money” laundered by the respondent was from D
the bookmaking offence in which he had participated.
E E
18. This Court agrees with the Secretary that the starting
point of 21 months’ imprisonment for the “money laundering”
F offence adopted by Judge Eddie Yip is manifestly inadequate in F
that it “falls outside [the range of sentences] which the Judge,
applying his mind to all the relevant factors, could reasonably
G G
consider appropriate.” (See Lord Lane CJ in Re A-G's Reference
(No 4 of 1989) [1990] 1 WLR 41, the test expressed on p.46A).
H H
19. This Court is of the view that the appropriate starting
point should not be lower than 4 years’ imprisonment even if the
I respondent is to be dealt with in a way most favourable to him.” I
J J
48. In fact, the sentencing framework of money laundering cases
K keeps on evolving in Hong Kong. In HKSAR and Boma [2012] 2 HKLRD K
33, the Court of Appeal emphasized at paragraph 38 that “the question of
L L
the amount of money laundered is not the be-all and end-all of a case, but
M is a significant feature”. The Court went on to list out other relevant factors M
that should be taken into account at paragraph 40:
N N
O (1) The nature of the predicate offence for generating O
“black money” and the sentence to be imposed;
P P
Q (2) Whether the defendant knew what the predicate offence Q
was;
R R
S (3) Whether there is an international element; S
T T
U U
V V
- 20 -
A A
B B
(4) Whether the offence of “money laundering” involves
C elaborate steps, schemes or fraudulent means; C
D D
(5) Whether there is a criminal syndicate;
E E
(6) The number of transactions and the length of time
F F
during which the offences were committed;
G G
(7) Whether the defendant continued to launder money
H H
after knowing the nature of the predicate offence;
I I
(8) The role and remuneration of the defendant.
J J
K 49. Applying the above principles and factors to be considered, K
Mr Wong submitted:
L L
M (a) The predicate offence was the inducement to invest in M
cryptocurrency with insider information promising
N N
profit via social media. It looks like fraud. This is the
O background of the black money transferred to D1’s O
accounts. The maximum sentence of fraud on
P P
conviction upon indictment is imprisonment for 14
Q years’ imprisonment: section 16A of the Theft Q
Ordinance, Cap 210;
R R
S (b) D1 did not know what the predicate offence was. D1 S
learned that the accounts would be used to collect
T T
illegal soccer bets in the amount of HK$100,000 each
U U
V V
- 21 -
A A
B B
day. Under section 7(1) of the Gambling Ordinance,
C Cap 148, any person who engages in bookmaking C
commits an offence and is liable on conviction on
D D
indictment to a fine of $5 million and to imprisonment
E for 7 years. Bookmaking is comparatively less serious E
than the predicate offence. Taking Wan Kwok Keung
F F
into consideration, it involved HK$14 million lasting
G for 7 years and the defendant directly participated in the G
predicate offence ie bookmaking. Not less than 4 years’
H H
imprisonment as the starting point was suitable.
I Therefore, D1 may be sentenced similarly; I
J J
(c) There was no international element;
K K
(d) D1 provided 3 bank accounts and personal information
L L
(2 accounts were newly opened) to Leung and Man
M Man for the purpose of collecting illegal soccer bets ie M
bookmaking. D1 just followed the instructions of
N N
Leung and Man Man who formulated elaborate steps,
O schemes or fraudulent means which lured D1 to their O
trap and ended up miserably;
P P
Q (e) There was a group of people who might or might not be Q
a criminal syndicate consisting of Leung and Man Man
R R
and some people who secured D1 in various hotel
S rooms and prevented D1 from leaving or S
communicating with other people or checking his bank
T T
accounts. But D1 was not a member of the group or the
U U
V V
- 22 -
A A
B B
criminal syndicate, he was tempted by the reward
C offered by Leung to provide assistance to bookmaking C
which was a less serious offence than the predicate
D D
offence which he did not know;
E E
(f) Charge 1 involved 81 deposits (HK$2,691,046.65)
F F
within 10 days; Charge 2 involved 29 deposits
G (HK$2,300,285) within 18 days; and Charge 3 involved G
66 deposits (HK$3,337,511) within 15 days. There
H H
were a total of 176 deposits (a total sim of
I HK$8,323,842.65) within 18 days. The length of time I
was relatively short and the total number of transactions
J J
was not too many comparatively speaking;
K K
(g) D1 did not know the nature of the predicate offence
L L
whatever it was, what D1 learned was that his accounts
M were involved in bookmaking, but he did not directly M
participate in bookmaking activity; and
N N
O (h) D1 was lured by Leung and Man Man to provide 3 bank O
accounts to them for bookmaking purpose, he was
P P
being used by them in return for the promised reward
Q which was not paid. He was the smallest potato who Q
played a very limited role. In fact, D1 was being foolish
R R
in doing what he was told to do.
S S
50. Factors to be considered include the amounts of money
T T
involved in the 3 charges and the likely corresponding sentences taking
U U
V V
- 23 -
A A
B B
into account the aggravating factors including D1 learned that the accounts
C would be used for bookmaking purpose in return for monetary reward; and C
D1 committed the offences with other people. HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi only
D D
provides the sentences imposed in some cases in relation to the amount of
E money laundered. The overall culpability of D1 is the most important in E
the determination of the suitable final sentence.
F F
G 51. Mr Wong suggested the following starting points: G
H H
(a) Charge 1 – 3 years’ imprisonment;
I I
(b) Charge 2 – 3 years’ imprisonment; and
J J
K (c) Charge 3 – 4 years’ imprisonment. K
L L
52. Mr Wong submitted that adding up the sentences after the 1/3
M reduction for timely guilty pleas would be too heavy. M
N N
53. Mr Wong submitted that if a global approach is applied, the
O total sum of black money is HK$8,328,842.65, the starting point is likely O
to be 4 years, resulting in 2 years 8 months’ imprisonment after guilty plea.
P P
There are 3 charges against D1 with aggravating factors. Mr Wong urges
Q the court to consider imposing wholly concurrent sentences (a) because the Q
periods of time when the offences happened overlapped on the same 18
R R
days and (b) on the application of the totality principle.
S S
54. D1 does not oppose the furnishing of information by the
T T
prosecution pursuant to section 27(2) of OSCO, Cap 455.
U U
V V
- 24 -
A A
B B
C 55. Mr Wong submitted that an enhancement of 20% to the C
sentence is sufficient for deterrence effect.
D D
E 56. Mr Wong submitted on behalf of D1 a total of two mitigation E
letters written in Chinese respectively by D1’s elder brother (and signed
F F
also by other family members) and D1’s employer. The contents are
G generally that D1 is a filial son and grandson and is willing to learn. The G
family members asked for a chance be given to D1 and pleaded for a lenient
H H
sentence on his behalf.
I I
57. Mr Wong also submitted a Foundation Certificate issued by
J J
Employees Retraining Board dated 19 May 2025 to show that D1 has
K completed a part-time 18-hour programme related to Security Training. K
L L
D2
M M
58. Ms Christine Leung of counsel assigned by the Director of
N N
Legal Aid mitigated on behalf of D2. The following is a summary of the
O mitigation submissions. O
P P
59. D2’s mother and his stepfather are in court to give him support.
Q Q
60. D2 was born in the Mainland and came to Hong Kong when
R R
he was 13. He now lives with his stepfather (70, retired) and mother (60,
S retired). S
T T
U U
V V
- 25 -
A A
B B
61. D2 used to be a construction site worker earning a monthly
C income of about $20,000. However, at the time of the incident, he was C
unemployed and had to rely on the family’s savings to make ends meet.
D D
He felt lost and helpless and wanted to relieve the family’s burden. D2
E was introduced to a man (M1) who said he (D2) would be financially E
rewarded if he were to lend him bank accounts. Due to greed and ignorance,
F F
D2 opened two accounts (A/C 4 and A/C 5) and lent them together with
G his own existing account (A/C 6) to M1 in exchange for cash remuneration. G
In the end, he did not get a single penny.
H H
I 62. D2 has a clear record and has been hardworking since he came I
to Hong Kong.
J J
K 63. D2 was cooperative with the police and confessed the crime K
under caution. He indicated his pleas of guilty at the earliest opportunity.
L L
M 64. The maximum penalty for money laundering offence is a fine M
of $5 million and imprisonment for 14 years.
N N
O 65. Ms Leung repeated para 9(a) to (e) of Hsu Yu Yi (supra) and O
laid emphasis on para 15 of Wan Kwok Keung (supra). Ms Leung also
P P
summarized the 8 factors in para 40 of Boma (supra).
Q Q
66. According to the admitted facts, D2 was not a member of the
R R
fraud behind the scenes. There was no evidence to show that he had
S knowledge of the predicate offence and the source of the funds. He only S
played a minimal role by opening and lending the accounts, hoping to earn
T T
U U
V V
- 26 -
A A
B B
remuneration in return. Due to his ignorance, D2 was used as a pawn and
C was exploited as the front with all his footsteps traceable. C
D D
67. It was submitted that D2 did not play a leading role in the
E entire plan, nor did he supervise or instigate others to launder money; nor E
did he personally deceive the victims; that D2 only followed instructions
F F
and handed over his mobile phone and the ultimate control of the accounts;
G that he did not know the amount involved was so large. G
H H
68. It was further submitted that the duration of the crime was
I brief: for Charge 4, it was 23 days; for Charge 5, it was 27 days; and for I
Charge 6, it was only 7 days. It was submitted that D2’s criminality was
J J
of a lower category warranting a lower starting point for sentencing.
K K
69. D2 has no objection to the prosecution furnishing the
L L
statement of CIP Li Yiu Nam dated 20 June 2025, pursuant to section 27(2)
M of OSCO, Cap 455. M
N N
70. With regard to enhancement of sentence, D2 does not oppose
O it but urges the court to exercise its discretion and make an enhancement O
of 25% (see HKSAR v Wan Minqiang [2025] HKDC 919).
P P
Q 71. The court was invited to impose concurrent sentences bearing Q
in mind (a) the fact that the dates of the 3 charges were around the same
R R
time and (b) the totality principle.
S S
72. Ms Leung submitted on behalf of D2 a total of 3 mitigation
T T
letters written in Chinese by respectively D2 himself, his parents and his
U U
V V
- 27 -
A A
B B
paternal grandmother. The contents are generally that D2 is regretful and
C will not commit the same mistake. The letter writers all asked for a lenient C
sentence and a chance be given to D2 so he may have a new start in life.
D D
E Sentence E
F F
73. There is an aggravating factor against D1 in that he committed
G the three offences with other people. G
H H
74. There is an aggravating factor against D2 in that he committed
I the offence subject of Charge 4 with other people. I
J J
75. The maximum penalty for the offence of money laundering is
K 14 years’ imprisonment. There are no sentencing guidelines but a deterrent K
sentence is always called for.
L L
M 76. I have borne in mind the sentencing principles as enunciated M
in Hsu Yu Yi, Boma and Wan Kwok Keung (all supra).
N N
O 77. In the case of D1, the total amount laundered was about $8.3 O
million. The predicate offence appears to be fraud; however, there was
P P
little evidence that D1 knew about this. The total duration of the three
Q offences was 18 days. D1’s role was not simply to allow others to use his Q
bank accounts; he was asked to withdraw monies too, though
R R
unsuccessfully. D1 knowingly committed the offences on behalf of an
S organized criminal syndicate. There were numerous transactions though S
the length of time over which the offences took place was limited and was
T T
in terms of days rather than months. D1 committed the offences on an
U U
V V
- 28 -
A A
B B
ongoing basis believing wrongly the funds were proceeds of bookmaking.
C D1 was promised a reward of $45,000 though it was doubtful if he was in C
fact paid.
D D
E 78. Bearing these considerations in mind, I adopt an initial global E
starting point of 4 ½ years’ imprisonment. Because of the aggravating
F F
factor of joint enterprise, I increase that starting point by 3 months to reach
G a final global starting point of 4 years and 9 months. G
H H
79. In the case of D2, the total amount laundered is about $14
I million. There is no evidence D2 knew about the predicate offence of fraud. I
The total duration of the three offences was 26 days. D2’s role was to
J J
allow others to use his existing or newly-opened bank accounts. There
K were numerous transactions though the length of time over which the K
offences took place was limited and was in terms of days rather than
L L
months. D2 was promised a reward of $12,000 for Charge 4 and an
M unknown reward for the other charges but there is no evidence they were M
paid up.
N N
O 80. Bearing these considerations in mind, I adopt an initial global O
starting point of 5 years and 2 months’ imprisonment. Because of the
P P
aggravating factor of joint enterprise for Charge 4 only, I increase that
Q starting point by one month to reach a final global starting point of 5 years Q
and 3 months.
R R
S 81. Both D1 and D2 pleaded guilty in good time. They shall be S
entitled to the customary 1/3 sentencing discount. In neither the case of
T T
U U
V V
- 29 -
A A
B B
D1 nor D2 do I see any other mitigating factors of weight to justify another
C sentencing discount. C
D D
82. Therefore, before any enhancement, the sentence of D1 would
E be 38 months’ imprisonment and that of D2 would be 42 months’ E
imprisonment.
F F
G 83. Neither D1 nor D2 opposed the furnishing of information by G
the prosecution pursuant to section 27(2) of OSCO, Cap 455. Nor did they
H H
oppose the request for enhanced sentencing by virtue of the information.
I I
84. Accordingly, I have received the witness statement of CIP Li
J J
Yiu Nam dated 20 June 2025.
K K
85. Table A on page 5 of the statement shows there was a rising
L L
trend in the use of money laundering stooges in figures (and proportion of
M arrested persons in detected Deception cases and Money laundering cases) M
from 760 (31.38%) in the year 2020 to 7,883 (75.10%) in the year 2024.
N N
The corresponding data for January to May of the year 2025 was 2,146
O (70.87%). By using the mathematical method of extrapolation, the O
projected figure and proportion for the whole of the year 2025 would result
P P
in 5,150 and 70.87%.
Q Q
86. It is noted that the forecast would see a drop in the trend from
R R
the year 2024 to the year 2025. However, 5,150 and 70.87% are still large
S numbers by comparison with the past historical data. I am therefore S
satisfied that the use of money laundering stooges in detected Deception
T T
U U
V V
- 30 -
A A
B B
and Money laundering cases is still prevalent. By implication, it cannot be
C denied that money laundering offences are still prevalent. C
D D
87. Table B on page 6 of the statement shows that for (local)
E Deception cases with money laundering element (detected with arrest), the E
reported losses consistently rose and came to a height of $2,143.41M (in
F F
4,701 cases) in the year 2024. The corresponding figure for January to
G May 2025 was $219.11M (in 742 cases). By using the mathematical G
method of extrapolation, the forecast for the whole year of 2025 would be
H H
$525.86M (in 1,7811 cases). This represents a drop. However, the amount
I of losses would still be significant. I
J J
88. But monetary loss is not the only harm that can be caused to
K the community. In para 18 on pp 5-6 of the statement, CIP listed several K
ways in which the anti-money laundering regime in Hong Kong is
L L
hampered by the increasing use of money laundering stooges, as follows:
M M
(a) The increasing number of stooge accounts interferes
N N
with the normal operation of the banking system,
O having a negative effect on the reputation of Hong O
Kong as a well-known international financial hub;
P P
Q (b) The increasing number of stooge accounts form Q
multiple layers of “shields” concealing the identity of
R R
the masterminds behind, making it difficult, if not
S impossible, for police to identify the masterminds S
behind;
T T
1
This figure was misread as “742” during delivery of sentences.
U U
V V
- 31 -
A A
B B
C (c) The increasing number of stooge accounts substantially C
facilitates the commission of crimes and in turn leads
D D
to more crimes being committed, as the mastermind
E could easily get away from their criminal liability; E
F F
(d) The increasing number of stooge accounts makes
G money laundering easier, which allows culprits to make G
use of their ill-gotten gains to extend their sphere to
H H
engage in a wider range of illegal activities;
I I
(e) The increasing number of stooge accounts means that
J J
the law enforcement agencies have to put in more
K investigation efforts and resources; and K
L L
(f) People with low income or less awareness of the
M consequences of selling their bank accounts are more M
likely to be lured by the culprits to take the risks of
N N
commission of crimes to surrender their accounts for
O monetary reward. O
P P
89. Bearing all these considerations in mind, I am satisfied that
Q the extent of harm, whether direct or indirect, caused to the community by Q
recent occurrences of money laundering offences is still substantial.
R R
S 90. For the dual reasons of prevalence of the offence and the S
substantial extent of the harm caused to the community, I will exercise my
T T
power under section 27(11) of OSCO, Cap 455, to enhance the sentences
U U
V V
- 32 -
A A
B B
of D1 and D2. I regard 24% enhancement as being just and appropriate in
C the circumstances of the case. C
D D
91. I am of the view that the resulting sentences of D1 and D2 are
E not excessive in the circumstances of the offences and the offenders. E
F F
92. I will award notional sentences (after enhancement) for the
G individual charges and make appropriate orders to arrive at the final G
sentences for both D1 and D2.
H H
I (D1 and D2, please stand) I
J J
93. For Charge 1, the sentence for D1 is 37 months’ imprisonment.
K K
94. For Charge 2, the sentence for D1 is 35 months’ imprisonment.
L L
M 95. For Charge 3, the sentence for D1 is 42 months’ imprisonment. M
N N
96. I order that 3 months of the sentence on Charge 1, and 2
O months of the sentence on Charge 2, are each to run consecutively to the O
sentence on Charge 3, making a final sentence for D1 of 47 months’
P P
imprisonment.
Q Q
97. For Charge 4, the sentence for D2 is 37 months’ imprisonment.
R R
S 98. For Charge 5, the sentence for D2 is 42 months’ imprisonment. S
T T
99. For Charge 6, the sentence for D2 is 47 months’ imprisonment.
U U
V V
- 33 -
A A
B B
C 100. I order that 2 months of the sentence on Charge 4, and 3 C
months of the sentence on Charge 5, are each to run consecutively to the
D D
sentence on Charge 6, making a final sentence for D2 of 52 months’
E imprisonment. E
F F
G G
( Isaac Tam )
H 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
A A
B B
DCCC 566/2024
C [2025] HKDC 1310 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 566 OF 2024
F F
G ---------------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
v
I CHAN YIN LUN (D1) I
POON KA MAN (D2)
J J
----------------------------------
K K
Before: His Honour Judge Tam
L L
Date: 31 July 2025
M Present: Mr Chu Ka Shing, Jonathan, Senior Public Prosecutor (Ag), M
for HKSAR
N N
Mr Wong Shun Yin, Terry, instructed by Adrian Yeung &
O Cheng, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the 1 st O
defendant
P P
Ms Leung Wan Chong, Christine, instructed by Ngans
Q Lawyers LLP, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Q
2nd defendant
R R
Offences: [1]-[3] Dealing with property known or believed to
S represent proceeds of an indictable offence（處理已知道或 S
T 相信為代表從可公訴罪行的得益的財產） - D1 T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
[4]-[6] Dealing with property known or believed to
C represent proceeds of an indictable offence（處理已知道或 C
相信為代表從可公訴罪行的得益的財產） - D2
D D
E ----------------------------------------- E
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
F F
-----------------------------------------
G G
1. D1 and D2 face a Charge Sheet consisting of a total of 6
H H
charges of Dealing with property known or believed to represent proceeds
I I
of an indictable offence, contrary to section 25(1) and (3) of the Organized
J
and Serious Crimes Ordinance, Cap 455. J
K K
2. Charges 1 to 3 are preferred against D1. Charges 4 to 6 are
L
preferred against D2. L
M M
3. D1 pleaded guilty to Charges 1 to 3. D2 pleaded guilty to
N Charges 4 to 6. N
O O
4. Particulars of Charges 1 to 3 are that D1, between A(1) and
P A(2), both dates inclusive, in Hong Kong, together with a male surnamed P
“Leung”, a female known as “Man Man” and other unknown persons,
Q Q
knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe that property namely a
R total sum of B Hong Kong currency in the bank account with C, account R
number D, in whole or in part directly or indirectly represented any
S S
person’s proceeds of an indictable offence, dealt with the said property.
T T
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
5. For Charge 1, A(1) is 14 February 2023; A(2) is 23 February
C 2023; B is $2,691,046.65; C is Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) C
Limited; D is 578-8-719590-1.
D D
E 6. For Charge 2, A(1) is 8 February 2023; A(2) is 25 February E
2023; B is $2,300,285; C is The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking
F F
Corporation Limited; D is 829-625474-833.
G G
7. For Charge 3, A(1) is 8 February 2023; A(2) is 22 February
H H
2023; B is $3,337,511; C is Bank of China (Hong Kong) Limited; D is 012-
I 792-2-027177-4. I
J J
8. Particulars of Charge 4 are that D2, between 30 January 2023
K and 20 February 2023, both dates inclusive, in Hong Kong, together with K
other unknown persons, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe
L L
that property namely a total sum of $2,550,256 Hong Kong currency in the
M bank account with Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) Limited, M
account number 570-1-963958-6, in whole or in part directly or indirectly
N N
represented any person’s proceeds of an indictable offence, dealth with the
O said property. O
P P
9. Particulars of Charges 5 to 6 are that D2, between E(1) and
Q E(2), both dates inclusive, in Hong Kong, knowing or having reasonable Q
grounds to believe that property namely a total sum of F Hong Kong
R R
currency in the bank account with G, account number H, in whole or in
S part directly or indirectly represented any person’s proceeds of an S
indictable offence, dealth with the said property.
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
10. For Charge 5, E(1) is 30 January 2023; E(2) is 24 February
C 2023; F is $3,968,644.5; G is The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking C
Corporation Limited; H is 166-859801-833.
D D
E 11. For Charge 6, E(1) is 16 February 2023; E(2) is 22 February E
2023; F is $8,149,037.01; G is Bank of China (Hong Kong) Limited; H is
F F
012-352-1-030789-0.
G G
Facts admitted by D1 and D2
H H
I 12. Between January and February 2023, PW1 to PW21 fell I
victim to similar investment frauds. In general, they were lured by
J J
swindlers, who approached them via social media, to invest in
K cryptocurrency on bogus online platform/website with insider K
information/promising return. As a result, these victims were deceived to
L L
transfer their funds to various designated accounts provided by the
M swindlers or the platform(s)/website(s), amongst which a total of M
HKD2,371,376 were made to A/C-1 to A/C-6 (defined below) from 16 to
N N
24 February 2023. Scams were unveiled when these victims were unable
O to withdraw their money. Cases were reported. O
P P
13. At the material times, D1 was the holder and sole account
Q signatory of the following 3 bank accounts:- Q
R R
(a) A bank account numbered 578-8-719590-1 held with
S Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) limited (“SCB”) S
(“A/C-1”);
T T
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
(b) A bank account numbered 829-625474-833 held with
C The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation C
Limited (“HSBC”) (“A/C-2”); and
D D
E (c) A bank account numbered 012-792-2-027177-4 held E
with Bank of China (Hong Kong) Limited (“BoC”)
F F
(“A/C-3”).
G G
D1’s SCB Account (A/C-1)
H H
I 14. A/C-1 was opened by D1 on 7 February 2018. D1 was the I
sole signatory. His reported income was HK$13,000. Statement was
J J
mailed to his residence in Tseung Kwan O.
K K
15. From September 2018 onwards, A/C-1 basically became idle
L L
until 14 February 2023 when A/C-1 was started to be used again.
M M
16. Between 14 and 23 February 2023, there were 81 deposits
N N
(HK$2,691,046.65) and 33 withdrawals (HK$2,638,491). There was a
O remaining balance of HK$52,539.44 after A/C-1 had no further O
transactions on 23 February 2023.
P P
Q D1’s HSBC Account (A/C-2) Q
R R
17. A/C-2 was opened by D1 on 8 February 2023. D1 was the
S sole signatory. He claimed to be unemployed and did not receive any S
social security. He left his residential address in Tseung Kwan O as
T T
correspondence address.
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
C 18. Between 8 and 25 February 2023, there were 29 deposits C
(HK$2,300,285) and 60 withdrawals (HK$2,300,238). There was a
D D
remaining balance of HK$47 after A/C-2 had no further transactions on 25
E February 2023. E
F F
D1’s BoC Account (A/C-3)
G G
19. A/C-3 was opened by D1 on 8 February 2023 and closed on
H H
13 March 2023. D1 was the sole signatory. He claimed to be unemployed.
I He left his residential address in Tseung Kwan O as correspondence I
address.
J J
K 20. Between 20 and 22 February 2023, there were 66 deposits K
(HK$3,337,511) and 81 withdrawals (HK$3,283,797.51). There was a
L L
remaining balance of HK$53,713.49 after A/C-3 had no further
M transactions on 22 February 2023. That amount (plus two entries of further M
interest) was withdrawn on 13 March 2023 when A/C-3 was closed.
N N
O 21. At the material times, D2 was the holder and sole account O
signatory of the following 3 bank accounts:-
P P
Q (a) A bank account numbered 570-1-963958-6 held with Q
SCB (“A/C-4”);
R R
S (b) A bank account numbered 166-859801-833 held with S
HSBC (“A/C-5”); and
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
(c) A bank account numbered 012-352-1-030789-0 held
C with BoC (“A/C-6”). C
D D
D2’s SCB Account (A/C-4)
E E
22. A/C-4 was opened by D2 on 30 January 2023. D2 was the
F F
sole signatory. He claimed to be a clerk earning HK$10,000 per month.
G He left his residential address in Tin Shui Wai as correspondence address G
to receive bank statements.
H H
I 23. The first transaction was a cash deposit of HK$3,000 on 30 I
January 2023. Then, there was a test deposit of HK$1 and withdrawal of
J J
HK$1 on 14 February 2023, followed by a cash withdrawal of HK$3,000
K on the same day. K
L L
24. A/C-4 became more active between 16 and 20 February 2023.
M In that period, there were 75 deposits (HK$2,547,255) and 65 withdrawals M
(HK$2,546,353.06). There was a remaining balance of HK$902.74 after
N N
A/C-4 had no further transactions on 20 February 2023.
O O
D2’s HSBC Account (A/C-5)
P P
Q 25. A/C-5 was opened by D2 on 30 January 2023. D2 was the Q
sole signatory. He claimed to be a part-time salesman earning
R R
HK$120,000 per year. He left his residential address in Tin Shui Wai as
S correspondence address. S
T T
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
26. The first transaction was a cash deposit of HK$100 on 13
C February 2023. C
D D
27. A/C-5 became more active between 17 and 24 February 2023.
E In that period, there were 68 deposits (HK$3,968,544.5) and 107 E
withdrawals (HK$3,968,613.9). There was a remaining balance of
F F
HK$30.6 after A/C-5 had no further transactions on 24 February 2023.
G G
D2’s BoC Account (A/C-6)
H H
I 28. A/C-6 was opened by D2 on 15 March 2013 and closed on 6 I
March 2023. D2 was the sole signatory. He claimed to be unemployed.
J J
He changed his correspondence address to his residential address in Tin
K Shui Wai on 15 February 2018. K
L L
29. Up until 6 February 2023, the use of A/C-6 appeared to be
M normal, and the amount of funds and transactions transacted through A/C- M
6 were not suspiciously large. It is noted that the last transaction before 16
N N
February 2023 was on 6 February 2023, to which there was a withdrawal
O of HK$3,800, making the balance to a minimal level of HK$24.54. O
P P
30. Between 16 and 22 February 2023, there were 150 deposits
Q (HK$8,149,037.01) and 137 withdrawals (HK$8,149,053.83). There was Q
a remaining balance of HK$7.72 after A/C-6 had no further transactions on
R R
22 February 2023.
S S
T T
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
Arrest of D1
C C
31. On 7 March 2023, D1 attended a police station, reporting that
D D
he was recruited by his secondary schoolmate surnamed LEUNG to work
E in marketing for quick money, but then he was kept by a group of people E
in hotels whilst surrendering his bank accounts. Upon police investigation,
F F
D1 eventually revealed that he was in fact told by LEUNG to surrender his
G accounts for collecting soccer bets. D1 was arrested. Under caution, D1 G
admitted that LEUNG asked him to give away his three bank accounts (ie
H H
A/C-1, A/C-2 and A/C-3) to collect soccer bets, and D1 would be rewarded
I HK$10,000 per day. In a subsequent video-recorded interview (VRI), D1 I
said under caution that:-
J J
K (a) He worked as a part-time decoration project assistant, K
making HK$15,000 per month.
L L
M (b) He acquainted LEUNG from secondary school, but M
since Form 3, LEUNG dropped out of school, and they
N N
had less contact until February 2023, when LEUNG
O introduced him a job to earn quick money. LEUNG O
said he started to do improper and suspicious jobs, and
P P
LEUNG asked him to recruit people to do parcel
Q delivery jobs. However, he did not know what those Q
parcels would contain, so he didn’t accept LEUNG’s
R R
job offer.
S S
(c) Later, LEUNG told him that there was another job that
T T
was to reside at a hotel and to provide bank accounts to
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
B B
receive illegal soccer bets. He learned that there would
C be around HK$100,000 of soccer bets being laundered C
through his accounts. He agreed to the job.
D D
E (d) He was then referred by LEUNG to an unknown female E
called Man Man on WhatsApp, who asked him to
F F
provide three accounts to the syndicate from either BoC,
G SCB, HSBC or HSB. Since he only had an HSB, he G
went to open BoC and HSBC accounts on 8 February
H H
2023. He had not seen Man Man before.
I I
(e) He was also asked to stay in a hotel room when his
J J
accounts were being used to launder illegal funds. He
K would be rewarded HK$10,000 per night (Saturday and K
Sunday would be counted as one night). He was
L L
promised to be rewarded HK$45,000 for staying 8
M nights (the first night not counted as no transaction M
would be done) as LEUNG would collect HK$60,000
N N
from the boss. During the stay at the hotel, he could
O not use his phone. O
P P
(f) Subsequently, he continued to chat with Man Man on
Q Telegram in a group called “Group 102”. There were Q
4-5 persons in that group, whom he did not know of.
R R
He provided his bank accounts details, his personal
S details (HKID card and proof of residence) to persons S
in this group.
T T
U U
V V
- 11 -
A A
B B
(g) He started to stay in a hotel on 19 February 2023. He
C was asked by someone called Ah Chuen to go to North C
Point MTR station at around 9 pm that day. Ah Chuen
D D
also told him that someone called Ah J would come to
E pick him up to go to the hotel, ie Hotel Plaza North E
Point. Ah J was the person serving as security guard
F F
guarding him at the hotel.
G G
(h) He met with Ah J at North Point MTR station, and they
H H
went to Hotel Plaza North Point. Ah J also asked him
I to give away the three ATM cards as well as his own I
mobile phone to Ah J, as they did not want him to use
J J
the phone that might affect the account record. At
K around 11 pm at the hotel lobby, he further met with K
another person called Ah Lung, who was another
L L
security guard. Then, Ah Lung took him to Room 2812
M in the hotel, where there were 3 persons, ie two security M
guards and a person (later known to be D2) who was
N N
also lending bank accounts for rewards.
O O
(i) He could not leave the hotel room, so the security
P P
guards would go out to buy takeaway for him and D2.
Q He stayed in Room 2812 until 22 February 2023. On Q
that day, two persons called Ah Bak and Ah Shui came
R R
to Room 2812. Ah Shui asked him for his HKID card
S to book another room, so he went with Ah Shui to check S
in another room. The hotel initially gave them a room
T T
U U
V V
- 12 -
A A
B B
on 30th floor, but later the hotel manager asked them to
C leave as they smoked in Room 2812. C
D D
(j) As such, the group of seven (including D1 & D2) left,
E and they went to a McDonald’s to wait for Ah J to book E
another hotel. Later, the group went to Kowloon
F F
Harbourfront Hotel in Hung Hom. Again, the group
G used his name to reserve a hotel room (Room 518). G
H H
(k) At around 9 pm on 22 February 2023, a female
I (referred to as “F1”) came to Room 518, who was also I
someone lending bank accounts for rewards. Since
J J
Room 518 could not allow too many people to stay, F1
K reserved another room (Room 512) in her name for her K
to stay.
L L
M (l) During the stay at the Hung Hom hotel, they changed M
to different rooms for different nights. Eventually, he
N N
left on 25 February 2023. The persons guarding him at
O first took him to a restaurant at Whampoa for lunch, as O
they needed to wait for the boss to clarify with certain
P P
matters concerning his bank accounts.
Q Q
(m) Whilst leaving, he called LEUNG as to his promised
R R
reward. LEUNG told him that the boss might not pay
S him, as he did not stay in hotel for 8 nights. At night, S
he checked his BoC and SCB accounts to find
T T
HK$50,000 each. LEUNG and Man Man told him to
U U
V V
- 13 -
A A
B B
transfer out those money, and he did so by mobile
C phone but failed. He tried again by cash withdrawal, C
but again failed.
D D
E (n) On 1 March 2023, LEUNG called him, telling him to E
go to SCB the next day as someone would assist him to
F F
withdraw money. Next day, he received a call from
G someone unknown, who claimed to assist him to cancel G
the bank accounts. That person never showed up, but
H H
that person asked him to walk inside the bank to handle
I account termination. However, the bank staff said the I
account could not be terminated at that time. Similarly,
J J
when LEUNG asked him to cancel the BoC account, he
K did as instructed but the account could not be cancelled. K
L L
(o) Most of his WhatsApp messages with LEUNG and
M Man Man were deleted, except some that he had M
discussed the job with Man Man.
N N
O (p) He was scared at first when he reported the case to O
police so he said he was detained by the syndicate, but
P P
later he wished to tell the whole truth to avoid any
Q misleading of police. Q
R R
32. In another cautioned VRI, D1 explained the WhatsApp
S messages with LEUNG and Man Man that he had kept from deleting as S
told by LEUNG, as he thought the deleting of those messages would not
T T
protect him but only to protect LEUNG. In those messages, LEUNG and
U U
V V
- 14 -
A A
B B
Man Man explained the job details of lending bank accounts to earn money,
C and that there were money left in his accounts after the syndicate had used C
them, so D1 was required to transfer them to LEUNG first.
D D
E Arrest of D2 E
F F
33. On 8 March 2023, D2 was arrested.
G G
34. On 15 May 2023, another team of police officers arrested D2
H H
at his public housing residence in Tin Shui Wai regarding his A/C-4
I receiving funds of PW1. Under caution, D2 said that he sold his A/C-4 to I
others. In subsequent cautioned VRI, D2 said that:-
J J
K (a) He was unemployed, and had worked as a construction K
worker about 2 months ago at a monthly wage of about
L L
HK$20,000. He had not filed any tax returns, nor did
M he own any vehicle or property; and he was not a M
director or shareholder of any company.
N N
O (b) He did not know PW1. O
P P
(c) He opened A/C-4 a few months ago for lending it to a
Q friend (M1) introduced by someone called Ah Chi for Q
receiving remittances at a reward of HK$12,000. He
R R
passed the online banking password to M1 after the
S account was opened. S
T T
U U
V V
- 15 -
A A
B B
(d) He was asked to stay in a hotel for 7 days and was not
C allowed to use his phone during the period. However, C
he did not receive the promised reward.
D D
E (e) He knew Ah Chi in a cyber café in 2015, and Ah Chi E
introduced M1 to him a few months ago. M1 asked him
F F
to open a Standard Chartered Bank account, but he was
G not very familiar with M1 and did not know M1’s name. G
H H
Examination of accounts
I I
35. In the examined period for each of A/C-1 to A/C-6, the
J J
transaction records exhibited money laundering hallmarks, including the
K use of test deposit of a small amount, large amount of transactions, low K
bank balance at the end of each transaction day, quick speed of fund
L L
dissipation, mirror pattern of aggregate amounts of deposits and
M withdrawals, and incommensurability of funds deposits. M
N N
Criminal records
O O
36. D1 has a previous clear record.
P P
Q 37. D2 has a previous clear record. Q
R R
Antecedents
S S
38. D1 is aged 28 (26 at the time of the offences), educated to F6
T T
level. He has been working as a Stage Lighting Technician since 2022
U U
V V
- 16 -
A A
B B
with a monthly salary of about $15,000. D1 lives in private housing in
C Tseung Kwan O with his parents, elder brother and elder sister. C
D D
39. D2 is aged 30 (27 at the time of the offences), educated to F3
E level. D2 has worked as a part-time waiter in restaurants. D2 lives in E
public housing in Tin Shui Wai.
F F
G Mitigation G
H H
D1
I I
40. Mr Terry Wong of counsel assigned by the Director of Legal
J J
Aid mitigated on behalf of D1. The following is a summary of the
K mitigation submissions. K
L L
41. D1 is a hardworking person, and has a kind heart in the eyes
M of his family. M
N N
42. Charge 1 spanned 10 days. There were 81 deposits (almost
O $2.7 million) and 33 withdrawals ($2.64 million) O
P P
43. Charge 2 spanned 18 days. There were 29 deposits ($2.3
Q million) and 60 withdrawals ($2.3 million). Q
R R
44. Charge 3 spanned 15 days. There were 66 deposits ($3.34
S million) and 81 withdrawals ($3.28 million). S
T T
U U
V V
- 17 -
A A
B B
45. There is no sentencing guideline for money laundering.
C Usually, the main consideration is the amount of “black money” involved. C
D D
46. In HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] 5 HKLRD 545, the Court of
E Appeal emphasized that the amount of money is a major sentencing E
consideration. Cheung JA, in giving the judgment of the court, also had
F F
the following observations at paragraph 9:
G G
“9. There are no sentencing guidelines for the offence of
H dealing with the proceeds from an indictable offence because the H
facts vary from case to case. However the following factors are
to be taken into account when determining sentence:
I I
(a) It is the amount of money involved that is a major
J consideration and not the amount of benefit J
received by a defendant in the transaction.
K (b) The culpability of the offence lies in the K
assistance, support and encouragement offered to
the commission of an indictable offence. So a
L L
defendant’s level of participation and the number
of occasions on which he is involved in the
M “money laundering” activities are relevant M
factors to be considered.
N (c) The offence of dealing with the proceeds from an N
indictable offence does not necessarily have any
O direct correlation with the indictable offence in O
question. However if the relevant indictable
offence can be identified, the court may take into
P account the sentence imposed on the indictable P
offence per se when determining the sentence of
Q
the dealing offence. Q
(d) If the case has an international element involving
R activities carried out across different regions, the R
court may impose a more severe sentence. This
is to protect Hong Kong’s reputation as an
S S
international finance and banking hub from being
tarnished.
T T
(e) The length of time the offence lasted.”
U U
V V
- 18 -
A A
B B
47. In Secretary for Justice v Wan Kwok Keung [2012] 1 HKLRD
C 201, Yeung JA (as he then was) observed that: C
D D
“12. “Money laundering” is a serious offence for not only
does it encourage criminal activities indirectly, but also attempts
E to legitimise the proceeds of crime. In order to crack down on E
serious crimes and to prevent offenders from getting financial
gains, it is necessary to deter the commission of “money
F laundering” offences (see Court of Appeal in HKSAR v Javid F
Kamran (unrep., CACC 400/2004, [2005] HKEC 80), HKSAR v
G Xu Xia Li [2004] 4 HKC 16). G
13. Generally, the sentence for a “money laundering”
H offence should mainly reflect the amount of “black money” H
laundered and not the benefit obtained by the defendant or others.
The reason being that it is very difficult to prove the benefit
I I
concerned, and in most “money laundering” cases, there may not
be evidence to show from what indictable offence the “black
J money” is in fact derived. Of course if there is information to J
prove that the “black money” originated from serious crimes,
including drug trafficking, kidnap and blackmail, illegal human
K trafficking and other organised crimes etc, or the defendant’s K
benefit is huge, then the sentence should be adjusted upward.
L L
14. This Court has, in a number of other similar cases, also
listed other factors relevant to the sentence to be imposed
M including the number of offences, the length of time the offence M
lasted, the degree to which the defendant participated in the
N
offence involving “black money” and whether or not it was an N
organised and sophisticated crime etc.
O 15. In HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] 5 HKLRD 545, Cheung O
JA set out the amounts of money involved and the sentences
passed in a number of “money laundering” cases. The
P P
sentencing starting point is 3 years or so where the “black money”
involved is between $1 million and $2 million; 4 years or so
Q where it is between $3 million and $6 million; and could be over Q
5 years where it is above $10 million.
R 16. The “black money” in this case was from illegal R
bookmaking on soccer gambling and not from a particularly
S serious crime, and the respondent’s offences, including his S
bookmaking offence, were not well organised either. According
to the respondent’s confession, the amount of money that he had
T received from the offence was not huge, it was not over T
$150,000. This Court agrees that where the offence of “money
laundering” is concerned, this case is not a very serious one.
U U
V V
- 19 -
A A
B B
17. However, this Court cannot ignore the fact that the
C respondent had “laundered money” on thousands of occasions C
for as long as seven years and the total amount involved was as
high as $14 million. And neither can this Court ignore the fact
D that the “black money” laundered by the respondent was from D
the bookmaking offence in which he had participated.
E E
18. This Court agrees with the Secretary that the starting
point of 21 months’ imprisonment for the “money laundering”
F offence adopted by Judge Eddie Yip is manifestly inadequate in F
that it “falls outside [the range of sentences] which the Judge,
applying his mind to all the relevant factors, could reasonably
G G
consider appropriate.” (See Lord Lane CJ in Re A-G's Reference
(No 4 of 1989) [1990] 1 WLR 41, the test expressed on p.46A).
H H
19. This Court is of the view that the appropriate starting
point should not be lower than 4 years’ imprisonment even if the
I respondent is to be dealt with in a way most favourable to him.” I
J J
48. In fact, the sentencing framework of money laundering cases
K keeps on evolving in Hong Kong. In HKSAR and Boma [2012] 2 HKLRD K
33, the Court of Appeal emphasized at paragraph 38 that “the question of
L L
the amount of money laundered is not the be-all and end-all of a case, but
M is a significant feature”. The Court went on to list out other relevant factors M
that should be taken into account at paragraph 40:
N N
O (1) The nature of the predicate offence for generating O
“black money” and the sentence to be imposed;
P P
Q (2) Whether the defendant knew what the predicate offence Q
was;
R R
S (3) Whether there is an international element; S
T T
U U
V V
- 20 -
A A
B B
(4) Whether the offence of “money laundering” involves
C elaborate steps, schemes or fraudulent means; C
D D
(5) Whether there is a criminal syndicate;
E E
(6) The number of transactions and the length of time
F F
during which the offences were committed;
G G
(7) Whether the defendant continued to launder money
H H
after knowing the nature of the predicate offence;
I I
(8) The role and remuneration of the defendant.
J J
K 49. Applying the above principles and factors to be considered, K
Mr Wong submitted:
L L
M (a) The predicate offence was the inducement to invest in M
cryptocurrency with insider information promising
N N
profit via social media. It looks like fraud. This is the
O background of the black money transferred to D1’s O
accounts. The maximum sentence of fraud on
P P
conviction upon indictment is imprisonment for 14
Q years’ imprisonment: section 16A of the Theft Q
Ordinance, Cap 210;
R R
S (b) D1 did not know what the predicate offence was. D1 S
learned that the accounts would be used to collect
T T
illegal soccer bets in the amount of HK$100,000 each
U U
V V
- 21 -
A A
B B
day. Under section 7(1) of the Gambling Ordinance,
C Cap 148, any person who engages in bookmaking C
commits an offence and is liable on conviction on
D D
indictment to a fine of $5 million and to imprisonment
E for 7 years. Bookmaking is comparatively less serious E
than the predicate offence. Taking Wan Kwok Keung
F F
into consideration, it involved HK$14 million lasting
G for 7 years and the defendant directly participated in the G
predicate offence ie bookmaking. Not less than 4 years’
H H
imprisonment as the starting point was suitable.
I Therefore, D1 may be sentenced similarly; I
J J
(c) There was no international element;
K K
(d) D1 provided 3 bank accounts and personal information
L L
(2 accounts were newly opened) to Leung and Man
M Man for the purpose of collecting illegal soccer bets ie M
bookmaking. D1 just followed the instructions of
N N
Leung and Man Man who formulated elaborate steps,
O schemes or fraudulent means which lured D1 to their O
trap and ended up miserably;
P P
Q (e) There was a group of people who might or might not be Q
a criminal syndicate consisting of Leung and Man Man
R R
and some people who secured D1 in various hotel
S rooms and prevented D1 from leaving or S
communicating with other people or checking his bank
T T
accounts. But D1 was not a member of the group or the
U U
V V
- 22 -
A A
B B
criminal syndicate, he was tempted by the reward
C offered by Leung to provide assistance to bookmaking C
which was a less serious offence than the predicate
D D
offence which he did not know;
E E
(f) Charge 1 involved 81 deposits (HK$2,691,046.65)
F F
within 10 days; Charge 2 involved 29 deposits
G (HK$2,300,285) within 18 days; and Charge 3 involved G
66 deposits (HK$3,337,511) within 15 days. There
H H
were a total of 176 deposits (a total sim of
I HK$8,323,842.65) within 18 days. The length of time I
was relatively short and the total number of transactions
J J
was not too many comparatively speaking;
K K
(g) D1 did not know the nature of the predicate offence
L L
whatever it was, what D1 learned was that his accounts
M were involved in bookmaking, but he did not directly M
participate in bookmaking activity; and
N N
O (h) D1 was lured by Leung and Man Man to provide 3 bank O
accounts to them for bookmaking purpose, he was
P P
being used by them in return for the promised reward
Q which was not paid. He was the smallest potato who Q
played a very limited role. In fact, D1 was being foolish
R R
in doing what he was told to do.
S S
50. Factors to be considered include the amounts of money
T T
involved in the 3 charges and the likely corresponding sentences taking
U U
V V
- 23 -
A A
B B
into account the aggravating factors including D1 learned that the accounts
C would be used for bookmaking purpose in return for monetary reward; and C
D1 committed the offences with other people. HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi only
D D
provides the sentences imposed in some cases in relation to the amount of
E money laundered. The overall culpability of D1 is the most important in E
the determination of the suitable final sentence.
F F
G 51. Mr Wong suggested the following starting points: G
H H
(a) Charge 1 – 3 years’ imprisonment;
I I
(b) Charge 2 – 3 years’ imprisonment; and
J J
K (c) Charge 3 – 4 years’ imprisonment. K
L L
52. Mr Wong submitted that adding up the sentences after the 1/3
M reduction for timely guilty pleas would be too heavy. M
N N
53. Mr Wong submitted that if a global approach is applied, the
O total sum of black money is HK$8,328,842.65, the starting point is likely O
to be 4 years, resulting in 2 years 8 months’ imprisonment after guilty plea.
P P
There are 3 charges against D1 with aggravating factors. Mr Wong urges
Q the court to consider imposing wholly concurrent sentences (a) because the Q
periods of time when the offences happened overlapped on the same 18
R R
days and (b) on the application of the totality principle.
S S
54. D1 does not oppose the furnishing of information by the
T T
prosecution pursuant to section 27(2) of OSCO, Cap 455.
U U
V V
- 24 -
A A
B B
C 55. Mr Wong submitted that an enhancement of 20% to the C
sentence is sufficient for deterrence effect.
D D
E 56. Mr Wong submitted on behalf of D1 a total of two mitigation E
letters written in Chinese respectively by D1’s elder brother (and signed
F F
also by other family members) and D1’s employer. The contents are
G generally that D1 is a filial son and grandson and is willing to learn. The G
family members asked for a chance be given to D1 and pleaded for a lenient
H H
sentence on his behalf.
I I
57. Mr Wong also submitted a Foundation Certificate issued by
J J
Employees Retraining Board dated 19 May 2025 to show that D1 has
K completed a part-time 18-hour programme related to Security Training. K
L L
D2
M M
58. Ms Christine Leung of counsel assigned by the Director of
N N
Legal Aid mitigated on behalf of D2. The following is a summary of the
O mitigation submissions. O
P P
59. D2’s mother and his stepfather are in court to give him support.
Q Q
60. D2 was born in the Mainland and came to Hong Kong when
R R
he was 13. He now lives with his stepfather (70, retired) and mother (60,
S retired). S
T T
U U
V V
- 25 -
A A
B B
61. D2 used to be a construction site worker earning a monthly
C income of about $20,000. However, at the time of the incident, he was C
unemployed and had to rely on the family’s savings to make ends meet.
D D
He felt lost and helpless and wanted to relieve the family’s burden. D2
E was introduced to a man (M1) who said he (D2) would be financially E
rewarded if he were to lend him bank accounts. Due to greed and ignorance,
F F
D2 opened two accounts (A/C 4 and A/C 5) and lent them together with
G his own existing account (A/C 6) to M1 in exchange for cash remuneration. G
In the end, he did not get a single penny.
H H
I 62. D2 has a clear record and has been hardworking since he came I
to Hong Kong.
J J
K 63. D2 was cooperative with the police and confessed the crime K
under caution. He indicated his pleas of guilty at the earliest opportunity.
L L
M 64. The maximum penalty for money laundering offence is a fine M
of $5 million and imprisonment for 14 years.
N N
O 65. Ms Leung repeated para 9(a) to (e) of Hsu Yu Yi (supra) and O
laid emphasis on para 15 of Wan Kwok Keung (supra). Ms Leung also
P P
summarized the 8 factors in para 40 of Boma (supra).
Q Q
66. According to the admitted facts, D2 was not a member of the
R R
fraud behind the scenes. There was no evidence to show that he had
S knowledge of the predicate offence and the source of the funds. He only S
played a minimal role by opening and lending the accounts, hoping to earn
T T
U U
V V
- 26 -
A A
B B
remuneration in return. Due to his ignorance, D2 was used as a pawn and
C was exploited as the front with all his footsteps traceable. C
D D
67. It was submitted that D2 did not play a leading role in the
E entire plan, nor did he supervise or instigate others to launder money; nor E
did he personally deceive the victims; that D2 only followed instructions
F F
and handed over his mobile phone and the ultimate control of the accounts;
G that he did not know the amount involved was so large. G
H H
68. It was further submitted that the duration of the crime was
I brief: for Charge 4, it was 23 days; for Charge 5, it was 27 days; and for I
Charge 6, it was only 7 days. It was submitted that D2’s criminality was
J J
of a lower category warranting a lower starting point for sentencing.
K K
69. D2 has no objection to the prosecution furnishing the
L L
statement of CIP Li Yiu Nam dated 20 June 2025, pursuant to section 27(2)
M of OSCO, Cap 455. M
N N
70. With regard to enhancement of sentence, D2 does not oppose
O it but urges the court to exercise its discretion and make an enhancement O
of 25% (see HKSAR v Wan Minqiang [2025] HKDC 919).
P P
Q 71. The court was invited to impose concurrent sentences bearing Q
in mind (a) the fact that the dates of the 3 charges were around the same
R R
time and (b) the totality principle.
S S
72. Ms Leung submitted on behalf of D2 a total of 3 mitigation
T T
letters written in Chinese by respectively D2 himself, his parents and his
U U
V V
- 27 -
A A
B B
paternal grandmother. The contents are generally that D2 is regretful and
C will not commit the same mistake. The letter writers all asked for a lenient C
sentence and a chance be given to D2 so he may have a new start in life.
D D
E Sentence E
F F
73. There is an aggravating factor against D1 in that he committed
G the three offences with other people. G
H H
74. There is an aggravating factor against D2 in that he committed
I the offence subject of Charge 4 with other people. I
J J
75. The maximum penalty for the offence of money laundering is
K 14 years’ imprisonment. There are no sentencing guidelines but a deterrent K
sentence is always called for.
L L
M 76. I have borne in mind the sentencing principles as enunciated M
in Hsu Yu Yi, Boma and Wan Kwok Keung (all supra).
N N
O 77. In the case of D1, the total amount laundered was about $8.3 O
million. The predicate offence appears to be fraud; however, there was
P P
little evidence that D1 knew about this. The total duration of the three
Q offences was 18 days. D1’s role was not simply to allow others to use his Q
bank accounts; he was asked to withdraw monies too, though
R R
unsuccessfully. D1 knowingly committed the offences on behalf of an
S organized criminal syndicate. There were numerous transactions though S
the length of time over which the offences took place was limited and was
T T
in terms of days rather than months. D1 committed the offences on an
U U
V V
- 28 -
A A
B B
ongoing basis believing wrongly the funds were proceeds of bookmaking.
C D1 was promised a reward of $45,000 though it was doubtful if he was in C
fact paid.
D D
E 78. Bearing these considerations in mind, I adopt an initial global E
starting point of 4 ½ years’ imprisonment. Because of the aggravating
F F
factor of joint enterprise, I increase that starting point by 3 months to reach
G a final global starting point of 4 years and 9 months. G
H H
79. In the case of D2, the total amount laundered is about $14
I million. There is no evidence D2 knew about the predicate offence of fraud. I
The total duration of the three offences was 26 days. D2’s role was to
J J
allow others to use his existing or newly-opened bank accounts. There
K were numerous transactions though the length of time over which the K
offences took place was limited and was in terms of days rather than
L L
months. D2 was promised a reward of $12,000 for Charge 4 and an
M unknown reward for the other charges but there is no evidence they were M
paid up.
N N
O 80. Bearing these considerations in mind, I adopt an initial global O
starting point of 5 years and 2 months’ imprisonment. Because of the
P P
aggravating factor of joint enterprise for Charge 4 only, I increase that
Q starting point by one month to reach a final global starting point of 5 years Q
and 3 months.
R R
S 81. Both D1 and D2 pleaded guilty in good time. They shall be S
entitled to the customary 1/3 sentencing discount. In neither the case of
T T
U U
V V
- 29 -
A A
B B
D1 nor D2 do I see any other mitigating factors of weight to justify another
C sentencing discount. C
D D
82. Therefore, before any enhancement, the sentence of D1 would
E be 38 months’ imprisonment and that of D2 would be 42 months’ E
imprisonment.
F F
G 83. Neither D1 nor D2 opposed the furnishing of information by G
the prosecution pursuant to section 27(2) of OSCO, Cap 455. Nor did they
H H
oppose the request for enhanced sentencing by virtue of the information.
I I
84. Accordingly, I have received the witness statement of CIP Li
J J
Yiu Nam dated 20 June 2025.
K K
85. Table A on page 5 of the statement shows there was a rising
L L
trend in the use of money laundering stooges in figures (and proportion of
M arrested persons in detected Deception cases and Money laundering cases) M
from 760 (31.38%) in the year 2020 to 7,883 (75.10%) in the year 2024.
N N
The corresponding data for January to May of the year 2025 was 2,146
O (70.87%). By using the mathematical method of extrapolation, the O
projected figure and proportion for the whole of the year 2025 would result
P P
in 5,150 and 70.87%.
Q Q
86. It is noted that the forecast would see a drop in the trend from
R R
the year 2024 to the year 2025. However, 5,150 and 70.87% are still large
S numbers by comparison with the past historical data. I am therefore S
satisfied that the use of money laundering stooges in detected Deception
T T
U U
V V
- 30 -
A A
B B
and Money laundering cases is still prevalent. By implication, it cannot be
C denied that money laundering offences are still prevalent. C
D D
87. Table B on page 6 of the statement shows that for (local)
E Deception cases with money laundering element (detected with arrest), the E
reported losses consistently rose and came to a height of $2,143.41M (in
F F
4,701 cases) in the year 2024. The corresponding figure for January to
G May 2025 was $219.11M (in 742 cases). By using the mathematical G
method of extrapolation, the forecast for the whole year of 2025 would be
H H
$525.86M (in 1,7811 cases). This represents a drop. However, the amount
I of losses would still be significant. I
J J
88. But monetary loss is not the only harm that can be caused to
K the community. In para 18 on pp 5-6 of the statement, CIP listed several K
ways in which the anti-money laundering regime in Hong Kong is
L L
hampered by the increasing use of money laundering stooges, as follows:
M M
(a) The increasing number of stooge accounts interferes
N N
with the normal operation of the banking system,
O having a negative effect on the reputation of Hong O
Kong as a well-known international financial hub;
P P
Q (b) The increasing number of stooge accounts form Q
multiple layers of “shields” concealing the identity of
R R
the masterminds behind, making it difficult, if not
S impossible, for police to identify the masterminds S
behind;
T T
1
This figure was misread as “742” during delivery of sentences.
U U
V V
- 31 -
A A
B B
C (c) The increasing number of stooge accounts substantially C
facilitates the commission of crimes and in turn leads
D D
to more crimes being committed, as the mastermind
E could easily get away from their criminal liability; E
F F
(d) The increasing number of stooge accounts makes
G money laundering easier, which allows culprits to make G
use of their ill-gotten gains to extend their sphere to
H H
engage in a wider range of illegal activities;
I I
(e) The increasing number of stooge accounts means that
J J
the law enforcement agencies have to put in more
K investigation efforts and resources; and K
L L
(f) People with low income or less awareness of the
M consequences of selling their bank accounts are more M
likely to be lured by the culprits to take the risks of
N N
commission of crimes to surrender their accounts for
O monetary reward. O
P P
89. Bearing all these considerations in mind, I am satisfied that
Q the extent of harm, whether direct or indirect, caused to the community by Q
recent occurrences of money laundering offences is still substantial.
R R
S 90. For the dual reasons of prevalence of the offence and the S
substantial extent of the harm caused to the community, I will exercise my
T T
power under section 27(11) of OSCO, Cap 455, to enhance the sentences
U U
V V
- 32 -
A A
B B
of D1 and D2. I regard 24% enhancement as being just and appropriate in
C the circumstances of the case. C
D D
91. I am of the view that the resulting sentences of D1 and D2 are
E not excessive in the circumstances of the offences and the offenders. E
F F
92. I will award notional sentences (after enhancement) for the
G individual charges and make appropriate orders to arrive at the final G
sentences for both D1 and D2.
H H
I (D1 and D2, please stand) I
J J
93. For Charge 1, the sentence for D1 is 37 months’ imprisonment.
K K
94. For Charge 2, the sentence for D1 is 35 months’ imprisonment.
L L
M 95. For Charge 3, the sentence for D1 is 42 months’ imprisonment. M
N N
96. I order that 3 months of the sentence on Charge 1, and 2
O months of the sentence on Charge 2, are each to run consecutively to the O
sentence on Charge 3, making a final sentence for D1 of 47 months’
P P
imprisonment.
Q Q
97. For Charge 4, the sentence for D2 is 37 months’ imprisonment.
R R
S 98. For Charge 5, the sentence for D2 is 42 months’ imprisonment. S
T T
99. For Charge 6, the sentence for D2 is 47 months’ imprisonment.
U U
V V
- 33 -
A A
B B
C 100. I order that 2 months of the sentence on Charge 4, and 3 C
months of the sentence on Charge 5, are each to run consecutively to the
D D
sentence on Charge 6, making a final sentence for D2 of 52 months’
E imprisonment. E
F F
G G
( Isaac Tam )
H 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