區域法院（刑事）H.H. Judge G. Lam14/8/2025[2025] HKDC 1406
DCCC1336/2024
由此
A A
B DCCC 1336/2024 B
[2025] HKDC 1406
C C
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
D D
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
E CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1336 OF 2024 E
F
____________ F
G HKSAR G
v
H H
NG Tsz-lung
I ____________ I
J J
Before : H.H. Judge G. Lam
K Date : 15 August 2025 K
Present : Mr. Fergus Chau, SPP, of the Department of
Justice, for HKSAR.
L L
Mr. David Cheung instructed by M/s NGANS
Lawyers LLP, assigned by the Director of Legal
M M
Aid, for the defendant.
Offences : (1) & (2) Dealing with property known or
N believed to represent proceeds of an indictable N
offence（處理已知道或相信為代表從可公訴罪
O 行的得益的財產） O
P P
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
Q Q
R R
The defendant pleaded guilty to 2 charges of "Money
S S
laundering". In short, he lent his bank accounts to someone.
T T
U U
V V
由此
- 2 -
A A
Summary of Facts
B B
C Charge 1 C
D D
2. On 21 December 2015, the defendant opened a bank account
E E
(No.012-831-1-054369-0) with Bank of China ("the BoC Account"). He
F F
claimed to be a delivery man earning less than HK$10,000 per month. The
G bank statements were sent to a Tin Shui Wai address provided by him. The G
H defendant was the sole signatory of the BoC Account. H
I I
J
3. In November 2020, Madam Chow (PW1) met someone J
surnamed Cheung through social media. Cheung introduced an online
K K
cryptocurrency platform named "LMAX" to PW1. Between 3 and 8
L L
December 2020, as instructed by the staff of LMAX, PW1 deposited a total
M M
sum of HK$240,000 into different bank accounts, including 3 deposits made
N N
to the BoC Account on 8 December 2020, which aggregated to a total sum
O O
of HK$110,000. When PW1 later wanted to convert her cryptocurrency into
P P
HK Dollars for withdrawal, LMAX claimed system malfunction and
Q subsequently became out of reach. The Police was alerted. Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
由此
- 3 -
A A
4. Between 5 and 9 December 2020, the BoC Account received
B B
23 deposits, which aggregated to a sum of HK$999,934 (including PW1's
C C
HK$110,000). A total sum of HK$999,952 was withdrawn by 22
D D
transactions. Bank records showed that from 5 December 2020 onwards,
E E
the amounts of deposits had increased significantly. Patterns such as large
F F
sum deposits, "mirror" transactions, quick speed of withdrawals (same day)
G and low balance were found. "Test" deposits and withdrawals in the sum of G
H $1 were often made during the offence period. H
I I
J
Charge 2 J
K K
5. On 2 September 2020, the defendant opened a corporate bank
L account (No.149-606618-838) held in the name of Blackjad Limited with L
M HSBC ("the HSBC Account"). He claimed to be the director, ultimate M
N beneficial owner (with 100% shareholding), key-controller and contact N
person of Blackjad. He was the sole signatory of the HSBC Account.
O O
P P
6. Between 10 October 2020 and 2 February 2021, the HSBC
Q Q
Account received 2 cash deposits which aggregated to a sum of HK$21,000
R R
and a transfer deposit in the sum of US$468,389.60. These funds were
S S
withdrawn very soon (from same day to one week) in cash (which
T T
U U
V V
由此
- 4 -
A A
aggregated to a sum of HK$808,600) and by transfers (which aggregated to
B B
sums of US$107.11 and HK$2,830,000).
C C
D D
Arrest
E E
7. The defendant was arrested on 14 September 2021 in relation
F F
to the HSBC Account. In his video recorded interview, the defendant
G G
admitted, inter alia, that he was a part-time warehouse worker, and was the
H H
sole person-in-charge of Blackjad. He claimed that he had forgotten when
I I
he set up Blackjad. A friend had asked him to do so. He did not use
J J
Blackjad to do any business. The HSBC Account was operated by a friend
K K
(named unknown) of another friend (named "Ah Man"). The defendant
L claimed not knowing the parties which deposited funds into the HSBC L
M Account. M
N N
8. The defendant was arrested on 19 January 2023 in relation to
O O
the BoC Account. In his video recorded interview, the defendant claimed
P P
that he did not know PW1 or the LMAX app.
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
由此
- 5 -
A A
Mitigation & Sentence
B B
C 9. The defendant is 43 and single. He has 2 conviction records, C
D both are unrelated to "money laundering". Defence counsel Mr. Cheung D
E
informed me that the defendant was a part-time warehouse worker. In E
mitigation, Mr. Cheung submitted that the defendant had no knowledge of
F F
any predicate offence related to either charge. He lent his 2 bank accounts to
G G
different friends and did not bother to check the bank statements afterwards.
H H
Mr. Cheung stressed that the defendant received no remuneration for
I I
lending out his 2 bank accounts; he was merely helping his friends.
J J
K 10. The prosecution has applied for an enhanced sentence pursuant K
L to section 27(2)(c) and (d) of the Organized and Serious Crimes Ordinance L
M
(Cap.455) on the basis of prevalence as well as the nature and extent of harm M
caused to the community. Mr. Cheung did not object.
N N
O O
11. I bear in mind the Court of Appeal's decision in HKSAR v Xu
P P
Mai Qing CACC 464/2005, whereas Yeung JA (as he then was) held "Under
Q Q
section 27(11) of OSCO, what the prosecution has to prove is the prevalence
R R
of the offence, not the increase in the number of such offences1."
S S
T T
1
Paragraph 16 on p.4 of the judgment.
U U
V V
由此
- 6 -
A A
12. I have read the witness statement of CIP Li dated 23 July 2025.
B B
I am satisfied that in 2020, deception-related money laundering cases were
C C
prevalent in Hong Kong in terms of the number of cases as well as the total
D D
value of monetary loss.
E E
F F
13. There is clear and cogent evidence before me that money
G laundering using bank accounts opened by "ML Stooges" is still widespread G
H and commonly being practised in Hong Kong today. What true criminals H
I need are gullible scapegoats like the defendant in the present case who I
J
would take the blame for them when the law enforcement takes action. The J
court must send a clear message to the general public that people who play
K K
the role of "ML Stooge" will receive severe punishment, so that there is a
L L
deterrent effect. When there are fewer or no willing "ML Stooges", the
M M
criminal activities which rely on their bank accounts would fail.
N N
O O
14. This is a typical case of money laundering by way of stooge
P P
bank accounts. The defendant claimed complete ignorance of the
Q investment scam against PW1; however, such a scam would have been Q
R meaningless without his bank account. Assuming what the defendant said is R
S
true, given his role, the total sums which went through his 2 accounts and S
T T
U U
V V
由此
- 7 -
A A
the overall circumstances, I grant the prosecution's application and will
B B
enhance the sentence by 25%.
C C
D D
15. The Court of Appeal in SJ v Wan Kwok Keung [2012] 1
E E
HKLRD 201 held :-
F F
Generally, the sentence for "money laundering" offences should mainly
G reflect the amount of "black money" laundered and not the benefit obtained G
by the defendant or others. The reason being that it is very difficult to prove
H the benefit concerned, and in most "money laundering" cases, there may H
not be evidence to show from what indictable offence the "black money" are
I I
in fact derived. Of course, if there is information to prove that the "black
money" is originated from serious crimes, including drug trafficking,
J J
kidnap and blackmail, illegal human trafficking, other organized crimes,
K etc. or the defendant's benefit is huge, then the sentence should be adjusted K
upward.2
L L
M M
16. In determining the proper starting point, I have reminded
N myself of the sentencing principles laid down in HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] N
O 5 HKLRD 545 and HKSAR v Boma Amaso [2012] 2 HKLRD 33. I have O
P also borne in mind the amounts of money involved, the duration of the P
offences, the defendant's role in relation to the movements of funds as well
Q Q
as his personal circumstances.
R R
S S
T T
2
Paragraphs 12 and 13, pp 204-205.
U U
V V
由此
- 8 -
A A
17. In SJ v Ngai Fung Sin Apple [2013] 5 HKLRD 104, Yeung V-P
B B
held :-
C C
Neither the fact that the "illicit/black money" was actually not derived from
D D
an indictable offence nor the defendant's ignorance of the actual source of
the "illicit/black money" is necessarily a valid mitigating factor…3
E E
F F
Charge 1
G G
18. I accept there is no evidence showing that: (i) except the
H H
HK$110,000 from PW1, the funds received by the BoC Account were
I I
related to any predicate offence; and (ii) the defendant was involved in or
J J
had any knowledge of any predicate offence. As the sole owner of the BoC
K K
Account, the defendant should have retained its ultimate control and paid
L L
attention to its transactions on a regular basis.
M M
N 19. On the other hand, I cannot overlook the fact that a total sum of N
O HK$999,934 went through the BoC Account within a period of 4 days. By O
lending his bank account to someone and thus allowing funds of unknown
P P
origins to pass through the BoC Account, the defendant played a pivotal role
Q Q
in helping the mastermind(s) of criminal activities to access their illegal
R R
funds without revealing their identities.
S S
T T
3
Paragraph 44, p 114.
U U
V V
由此
- 9 -
A A
20. In the circumstances, I adopt a starting point of 3 years'
B B
imprisonment 4 . With the timely guilty plea, the sentence becomes 24
C C
months. With the 25% enhancement, I sentence the defendant to 30 months'
D D
imprisonment for this charge.
E E
F F
Charge 2
G G
21. There is no evidence showing that the funds received by the
H H
HSBC Account were related to any predicate offence. A total sum of
I I
HK$21,000 and US$468,389.60 (i.e. approximately HK$3.67 million 5 in
J J
total) went through the HSBC Account within a period of 5 months. Hence,
K K
I adopt a starting point of 4 years' imprisonment6. With the timely guilty
L plea, the sentence becomes 32 months. With the 25% enhancement, I L
M sentence the defendant to 40 months' imprisonment for this charge. M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S 4 S
According to Wan Kwok Keung (supra), the starting point is 3 years or so where the "black
money" involved is between $1 million and $2 million. (See paragraph 15 of the judgment)
5
Adopting HK$7.80 to US$1 as the exchange rate.
T 6
According to Wan Kwok Keung (supra), the starting point is 4 years or so where the "black T
money" involved is between $3 million and $6 million. (See paragraph 15 of the judgment)
U U
V V
由此
- 10 -
A A
Overall sentence
B B
C 22. The total sum received by the 2 bank accounts was HK$4.67 C
D million odd. Bearing in mind the totality principle, I consider a global D
E
starting point of 4 years' imprisonment appropriate and just. With the timely E
guilty pleas, the overall sentence is reduced to 32 months. Apart from this, I
F F
see no other mitigating factors which warrant any further reduction. With
G G
the 25% enhancement, the final overall sentence becomes 40 months. To
H H
achieve this, I order the sentences for both charges to run concurrently.
I I
J J
K K
(G. Lam)
L District Judge L
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
由此
A A
B DCCC 1336/2024 B
[2025] HKDC 1406
C C
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
D D
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
E CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1336 OF 2024 E
F
____________ F
G HKSAR G
v
H H
NG Tsz-lung
I ____________ I
J J
Before : H.H. Judge G. Lam
K Date : 15 August 2025 K
Present : Mr. Fergus Chau, SPP, of the Department of
Justice, for HKSAR.
L L
Mr. David Cheung instructed by M/s NGANS
Lawyers LLP, assigned by the Director of Legal
M M
Aid, for the defendant.
Offences : (1) & (2) Dealing with property known or
N believed to represent proceeds of an indictable N
offence（處理已知道或相信為代表從可公訴罪
O 行的得益的財產） O
P P
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
Q Q
R R
The defendant pleaded guilty to 2 charges of "Money
S S
laundering". In short, he lent his bank accounts to someone.
T T
U U
V V
由此
- 2 -
A A
Summary of Facts
B B
C Charge 1 C
D D
2. On 21 December 2015, the defendant opened a bank account
E E
(No.012-831-1-054369-0) with Bank of China ("the BoC Account"). He
F F
claimed to be a delivery man earning less than HK$10,000 per month. The
G bank statements were sent to a Tin Shui Wai address provided by him. The G
H defendant was the sole signatory of the BoC Account. H
I I
J
3. In November 2020, Madam Chow (PW1) met someone J
surnamed Cheung through social media. Cheung introduced an online
K K
cryptocurrency platform named "LMAX" to PW1. Between 3 and 8
L L
December 2020, as instructed by the staff of LMAX, PW1 deposited a total
M M
sum of HK$240,000 into different bank accounts, including 3 deposits made
N N
to the BoC Account on 8 December 2020, which aggregated to a total sum
O O
of HK$110,000. When PW1 later wanted to convert her cryptocurrency into
P P
HK Dollars for withdrawal, LMAX claimed system malfunction and
Q subsequently became out of reach. The Police was alerted. Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
由此
- 3 -
A A
4. Between 5 and 9 December 2020, the BoC Account received
B B
23 deposits, which aggregated to a sum of HK$999,934 (including PW1's
C C
HK$110,000). A total sum of HK$999,952 was withdrawn by 22
D D
transactions. Bank records showed that from 5 December 2020 onwards,
E E
the amounts of deposits had increased significantly. Patterns such as large
F F
sum deposits, "mirror" transactions, quick speed of withdrawals (same day)
G and low balance were found. "Test" deposits and withdrawals in the sum of G
H $1 were often made during the offence period. H
I I
J
Charge 2 J
K K
5. On 2 September 2020, the defendant opened a corporate bank
L account (No.149-606618-838) held in the name of Blackjad Limited with L
M HSBC ("the HSBC Account"). He claimed to be the director, ultimate M
N beneficial owner (with 100% shareholding), key-controller and contact N
person of Blackjad. He was the sole signatory of the HSBC Account.
O O
P P
6. Between 10 October 2020 and 2 February 2021, the HSBC
Q Q
Account received 2 cash deposits which aggregated to a sum of HK$21,000
R R
and a transfer deposit in the sum of US$468,389.60. These funds were
S S
withdrawn very soon (from same day to one week) in cash (which
T T
U U
V V
由此
- 4 -
A A
aggregated to a sum of HK$808,600) and by transfers (which aggregated to
B B
sums of US$107.11 and HK$2,830,000).
C C
D D
Arrest
E E
7. The defendant was arrested on 14 September 2021 in relation
F F
to the HSBC Account. In his video recorded interview, the defendant
G G
admitted, inter alia, that he was a part-time warehouse worker, and was the
H H
sole person-in-charge of Blackjad. He claimed that he had forgotten when
I I
he set up Blackjad. A friend had asked him to do so. He did not use
J J
Blackjad to do any business. The HSBC Account was operated by a friend
K K
(named unknown) of another friend (named "Ah Man"). The defendant
L claimed not knowing the parties which deposited funds into the HSBC L
M Account. M
N N
8. The defendant was arrested on 19 January 2023 in relation to
O O
the BoC Account. In his video recorded interview, the defendant claimed
P P
that he did not know PW1 or the LMAX app.
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
由此
- 5 -
A A
Mitigation & Sentence
B B
C 9. The defendant is 43 and single. He has 2 conviction records, C
D both are unrelated to "money laundering". Defence counsel Mr. Cheung D
E
informed me that the defendant was a part-time warehouse worker. In E
mitigation, Mr. Cheung submitted that the defendant had no knowledge of
F F
any predicate offence related to either charge. He lent his 2 bank accounts to
G G
different friends and did not bother to check the bank statements afterwards.
H H
Mr. Cheung stressed that the defendant received no remuneration for
I I
lending out his 2 bank accounts; he was merely helping his friends.
J J
K 10. The prosecution has applied for an enhanced sentence pursuant K
L to section 27(2)(c) and (d) of the Organized and Serious Crimes Ordinance L
M
(Cap.455) on the basis of prevalence as well as the nature and extent of harm M
caused to the community. Mr. Cheung did not object.
N N
O O
11. I bear in mind the Court of Appeal's decision in HKSAR v Xu
P P
Mai Qing CACC 464/2005, whereas Yeung JA (as he then was) held "Under
Q Q
section 27(11) of OSCO, what the prosecution has to prove is the prevalence
R R
of the offence, not the increase in the number of such offences1."
S S
T T
1
Paragraph 16 on p.4 of the judgment.
U U
V V
由此
- 6 -
A A
12. I have read the witness statement of CIP Li dated 23 July 2025.
B B
I am satisfied that in 2020, deception-related money laundering cases were
C C
prevalent in Hong Kong in terms of the number of cases as well as the total
D D
value of monetary loss.
E E
F F
13. There is clear and cogent evidence before me that money
G laundering using bank accounts opened by "ML Stooges" is still widespread G
H and commonly being practised in Hong Kong today. What true criminals H
I need are gullible scapegoats like the defendant in the present case who I
J
would take the blame for them when the law enforcement takes action. The J
court must send a clear message to the general public that people who play
K K
the role of "ML Stooge" will receive severe punishment, so that there is a
L L
deterrent effect. When there are fewer or no willing "ML Stooges", the
M M
criminal activities which rely on their bank accounts would fail.
N N
O O
14. This is a typical case of money laundering by way of stooge
P P
bank accounts. The defendant claimed complete ignorance of the
Q investment scam against PW1; however, such a scam would have been Q
R meaningless without his bank account. Assuming what the defendant said is R
S
true, given his role, the total sums which went through his 2 accounts and S
T T
U U
V V
由此
- 7 -
A A
the overall circumstances, I grant the prosecution's application and will
B B
enhance the sentence by 25%.
C C
D D
15. The Court of Appeal in SJ v Wan Kwok Keung [2012] 1
E E
HKLRD 201 held :-
F F
Generally, the sentence for "money laundering" offences should mainly
G reflect the amount of "black money" laundered and not the benefit obtained G
by the defendant or others. The reason being that it is very difficult to prove
H the benefit concerned, and in most "money laundering" cases, there may H
not be evidence to show from what indictable offence the "black money" are
I I
in fact derived. Of course, if there is information to prove that the "black
money" is originated from serious crimes, including drug trafficking,
J J
kidnap and blackmail, illegal human trafficking, other organized crimes,
K etc. or the defendant's benefit is huge, then the sentence should be adjusted K
upward.2
L L
M M
16. In determining the proper starting point, I have reminded
N myself of the sentencing principles laid down in HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] N
O 5 HKLRD 545 and HKSAR v Boma Amaso [2012] 2 HKLRD 33. I have O
P also borne in mind the amounts of money involved, the duration of the P
offences, the defendant's role in relation to the movements of funds as well
Q Q
as his personal circumstances.
R R
S S
T T
2
Paragraphs 12 and 13, pp 204-205.
U U
V V
由此
- 8 -
A A
17. In SJ v Ngai Fung Sin Apple [2013] 5 HKLRD 104, Yeung V-P
B B
held :-
C C
Neither the fact that the "illicit/black money" was actually not derived from
D D
an indictable offence nor the defendant's ignorance of the actual source of
the "illicit/black money" is necessarily a valid mitigating factor…3
E E
F F
Charge 1
G G
18. I accept there is no evidence showing that: (i) except the
H H
HK$110,000 from PW1, the funds received by the BoC Account were
I I
related to any predicate offence; and (ii) the defendant was involved in or
J J
had any knowledge of any predicate offence. As the sole owner of the BoC
K K
Account, the defendant should have retained its ultimate control and paid
L L
attention to its transactions on a regular basis.
M M
N 19. On the other hand, I cannot overlook the fact that a total sum of N
O HK$999,934 went through the BoC Account within a period of 4 days. By O
lending his bank account to someone and thus allowing funds of unknown
P P
origins to pass through the BoC Account, the defendant played a pivotal role
Q Q
in helping the mastermind(s) of criminal activities to access their illegal
R R
funds without revealing their identities.
S S
T T
3
Paragraph 44, p 114.
U U
V V
由此
- 9 -
A A
20. In the circumstances, I adopt a starting point of 3 years'
B B
imprisonment 4 . With the timely guilty plea, the sentence becomes 24
C C
months. With the 25% enhancement, I sentence the defendant to 30 months'
D D
imprisonment for this charge.
E E
F F
Charge 2
G G
21. There is no evidence showing that the funds received by the
H H
HSBC Account were related to any predicate offence. A total sum of
I I
HK$21,000 and US$468,389.60 (i.e. approximately HK$3.67 million 5 in
J J
total) went through the HSBC Account within a period of 5 months. Hence,
K K
I adopt a starting point of 4 years' imprisonment6. With the timely guilty
L plea, the sentence becomes 32 months. With the 25% enhancement, I L
M sentence the defendant to 40 months' imprisonment for this charge. M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S 4 S
According to Wan Kwok Keung (supra), the starting point is 3 years or so where the "black
money" involved is between $1 million and $2 million. (See paragraph 15 of the judgment)
5
Adopting HK$7.80 to US$1 as the exchange rate.
T 6
According to Wan Kwok Keung (supra), the starting point is 4 years or so where the "black T
money" involved is between $3 million and $6 million. (See paragraph 15 of the judgment)
U U
V V
由此
- 10 -
A A
Overall sentence
B B
C 22. The total sum received by the 2 bank accounts was HK$4.67 C
D million odd. Bearing in mind the totality principle, I consider a global D
E
starting point of 4 years' imprisonment appropriate and just. With the timely E
guilty pleas, the overall sentence is reduced to 32 months. Apart from this, I
F F
see no other mitigating factors which warrant any further reduction. With
G G
the 25% enhancement, the final overall sentence becomes 40 months. To
H H
achieve this, I order the sentences for both charges to run concurrently.
I I
J J
K K
(G. Lam)
L District Judge L
M M
N N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V