A A
B B
DCCC 998/2024
C [2025] HKDC 1510 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 998 OF 2024
F F
G ---------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
v
I TONG CHIN PANG I
----------------------------
J J
K Before: His Honour Judge Tam in Court K
Date: 1 September 2025
L L
Present: Ms Mo Kwok Ping Alison, Public Prosecutor, for HKSAR
M Mr Chang Peng Geoffrey, instructed by Henry Yu & M
Associates, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the
N N
defendant
O Offences: [1] – [2] Dealing with property known or believed to represent O
proceeds of an indictable offence (處理已知道或相信為代
P P
表從可公訴罪行的得益的財產)
Q Q
R --------------------------------------- R
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
S S
---------------------------------------
T T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
1. Mr Tong pleaded guilty before me to two charges of Dealing
C with property known or believed to represent proceeds of an indictable C
offence, contrary to section 25(1) and (3) of the Organized and Serious
D D
Crimes Ordinance, Cap 455, on a Charge Sheet as follows.
E E
2. Particulars of Charge 1 are that he, between 5 November 2020
F F
and 2 December 2020, both dates inclusive, in Hong Kong, together with
G a person unknown, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe that G
property namely a total sum of $5,478,264.50 Hong Kong currency in the
H H
bank account with The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation
I Limited, account number 634715981833, in whole or in part directly or I
indirectly represented any person’s proceeds of an indictable offence, dealt
J J
with the said property.
K K
3. Particulars of Charge 2 are that he, between 24 November
L L
2020 and 16 April 2021, both dates inclusive, in Hong Kong, together with
M a person unknown, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe that M
property namely a total sum of $3,012,704.50 Hong Kong currency in the
N N
bank account with Bank of China (Hong Kong) Limited, account number
O 01235810382396, in whole or in part directly or indirectly represented any O
person’s proceeds of an indictable offence, dealt with the said property.
P P
Q Facts admitted by Mr Tong Q
R R
4. In the first case, PW1 (female aged 78) was duped by
S scammers purporting to be Mainland PSB officers into handing over her S
online banking credentials. A total sum of about $82 million belonging to
T T
PW1 was remitted by the scammers to various bank accounts one of which
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
was Mr Tong’s bank account with HSBC, namely the bank account under
C Charge 1, which received sums totalling $5,477,554 in this regard between C
23 November and 2 December 2020 over 16 occasions.
D D
E 5. Between 5 November and 2 December 2020, the same E
account recorded a total deposit of $5,478,264.50 over 25 transactions and
F F
a total withdrawal of $5,478,186.60 over 25 occasions.
G G
6. Mr Tong was provided with bank statements sent to his
H H
reported residential address in Kwai Chung by HSBC.
I I
7. In the second case, PW2 was duped by an imposter with
J J
whom she fell in love into joining some bogus investment schemes. She
K remitted altogether $2,716,200 to various bank accounts one of which was K
Mr Tong’s bank account with Bank of China, ie the bank account under
L L
Charge 2, which received $1.5 million on one occasion on 11 December
M 2020. M
N N
8. Between 24 November 2020 and 16 April 2021, that BOC
O account recorded a total deposit of $3,012,704.50 over 17 transactions and O
a total withdrawal of $3,012,705.02 over 24 occasions.
P P
Q 9. Mr Tong was provided with bank statements by BOC. Q
R R
10. Funds flow analyses showed all the funds, once deposited into
S both accounts were siphoned off within the same day to their respective S
USD accounts or other people’s bank accounts.
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
11. Mr Tong was arrested on 15 January 2021 and 7 November
C 2023 in relation to the BOC account and the HSBC account respectively. C
Under caution, Mr Tong admitted selling the BOC bank account and the
D D
HSBC bank account to a stranger for a monetary reward of $7,500 and
E $2,500 respectively. E
F F
12. Companies Registry records show Mr Tong held directorship
G of a company called “Far-east digital outlet Limited” since 5 January 2021. G
H H
Criminal record
I I
13. Mr Tong has 24 previous convictions none similar. However,
J J
half of the convictions were related to either theft or other Theft Ordinance
K offences. A majority of the theft convictions were related to shoplifting. K
L L
Antecedents
M M
14. Mr Tong is aged 51 (47 at the time of the offences), educated
N N
to Secondary 3 level, unemployed.
O O
Mitigation
P P
Q 15. Mr Geoffrey Chang of counsel assigned by the Director of Q
Legal Aid mitigated on behalf of Mr Tong. The following is a summary
R R
of the mitigation submissions.
S S
16. Mr Tong was born in Hong Kong, unmarried. His father (81)
T T
and mother (90) are both retirees. Mr Tong was the only child of the family.
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
C 17. Mr Tong’s last occupation was as a warehouse clerk, for about C
5 years. Between 2003 and 2004, Mr Tong ceased work due to some
D D
mental issue. He is currently unemployed and receives CSSA.
E E
18. In the past, Mr Tong has had some mental issue.
F F
G 19. Around early November 2020, Mr Tong saw a Facebook job G
advertisement urgently recruiting an assistant for remote work with no
H H
experience required and offering a daily wage of $500. Mr Tong left his
I contact number. A “Mr Lau” called back, claiming to be from an HR I
company seeking an assistant to distribute salaries to employees and to
J J
verify attendance records. Mr Lau requested Mr Tong’s full banking
K details so the company could deposit funds into Mr Tong’s account for K
onward transfer to employees. He described the role as simple, short-hours,
L L
phone-based and work from home. He offered $2,500 upon account being
M set up and he urged Mr Tong to start immediately. M
N N
20. Mr Tong already held a BOC account. Following Mr Lau’s
O instructions, Mr Tong activated its online banking services. Following Mr O
Lau’s instructions, Mr Tong opened an HSBC account. Unaware of the
P P
scam (meaning the employment scam), Mr Tong provided all bank details
Q including account numbers, ATM cards, passwords, online banking Q
credentials, email, and phone number to Mr Lau who stated that the
R R
company needed transaction records to verify salary payments. Mr Lau
S later invited Mr Tong to “discuss work” at a hotel for a week. Mr Tong S
declined as he was subjected to mandatory night-stay order at a designated
T T
care-home as part of his mental treatment.
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
C 21. At an in-person meeting in Mong Kok, Mr Lau gave Mr Tong C
$2,500 and persuaded him to start a business together. Another “colleague”
D D
later made appointments to meet Mr Tong at an accounting firm, and later
E at Kwai Fong MTR Station. Mr Tong met with two men who offered E
$7,000 to him to set up a company and a corporate bank account. Mr Tong
F F
refused because he found the process complex and unsuitable for him.
G G
22. Days later, Mr Lau called Mr Tong, threatening to terminate
H H
his employment unless he opened the company accounts. After an
I argument, Mr Lau declared Mr Tong “fired” and stated that the two I
personal accounts be treated as “sold” to the company, and cut off contact.
J J
K 23. Mr Tong was arrested 3 days later. K
L L
24. Mr Chang assured the court that Mr Tong is guilty of the
M offences charged under the second limb of the mens rea requirement. M
N N
25. In HKSAR v Ho Shun Hsiung CACC 472/2009: money
O laundering of HK$4,150,000 with 5 charges, international element and O
foreign remittances. After guilty plea, 3 years’ imprisonment (global
P P
starting point: ~4.5 years).
Q Q
26. In HKSAR v Jain Nikhil and Anor [2007] 2 HKC 205:
R R
laundering of HK$6,600,000 with fraud proceeds, victim loss being
S HK$3,900,000. After guilty plea, 3 years and 4 months’ imprisonment. S
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
27. For Charge 1 (HK$5,478,264.50), the appropriate starting
C point should be around 4-4.5 years. For Charge 2 (HK$3,012,704.50), the C
appropriate starting point should be in the region of 3-4 years (~3.5 years).
D D
E 28. Mr Chang submitted there is no international element in the E
present case.
F F
G 29. In respect of sentence enhancement, Mr Chang has the G
following submissions.
H H
I 30. In the witness statement of CIP Li Yiu Nam dated 18 July I
2025, paras 14, 15 and 17(b) described circumstances which Mr Tong
J J
experienced, namely, he was a victim of an “employment scam”.
K K
31. Table B in the witness statement shows an upward trend in
L L
similar cases peaking in 2022.
M M
32. Mr Tong played the lowest-tier role: he was deceived into
N N
providing his bank accounts for fraudulent use under the guise of
O employment. Thus, the enhancement should apply at the lower range O
(20%-30%).
P P
Q 33. Mr Tong suffers from chronic schizophrenia (with symptoms Q
like auditory hallucinations) stemming from bipolar disorder. Over two
R R
decades, he underwent repeated long-term hospitalizations and has resided
S in a psychiatric nursing home for 9 years under medical order. His S
condition:
T T
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
(a) Renders him more susceptible to deception than
C mentally healthy individuals; and C
D D
(b) Impairs his ability to foresee consequences.
E E
34. Mr Chang requested the court to commission a psychiatric
F F
report to assess Mr Tong’s mental state and its impact on his culpability at
G the time of the offence (sic). Given Mr Tong’s condition, Mr Chang sought G
reduced culpability and a lower enhancement.
H H
I 35. Mr Tong pleaded guilty and is entitled to a one-third I
sentencing discount.
J J
K 36. Mr Chang submitted that Mr Tong’s role was minor; that he K
himself was a victim of fraud; that his mental illness exacerbated his
L L
vulnerability; that his culpability is thus relatively low. Mr Chang urged
M the court to: M
N N
(a) Order concurrent sentences; or
O O
(b) If consecutive sentences are imposed, set a low overall
P P
sentence commensurate with Mr Tong’s reduced
Q culpability. Q
R R
37. Mr Chang submitted on behalf of Mr Tong one mitigation
S letter written in Chinese by Mr Tong’s father. The contents generally are S
that the case has dragged on for 4 years causing the family members to
T T
suffer long-term worry, insomnia and depression; that Mr Tong’s mother
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
suffers long-term illness (medical history in English enclosed). The father
C asked that Mr Tong be dealt with leniently so the family can be reunited C
early.
D D
E 38. Having received the psychiatric report called for (more E
below), Mr Chang submitted that Mr Tong agreed to the contents which
F F
confirmed the psychiatric history of Mr Tong.
G G
39. When questioned by the court about Mr Tong’s claim in
H H
mitigation that he refused the scammers’ request to open a company which
I was contradicted by the Amended Summary of Facts para 8, Mr Chang, I
after taking instructions, submitted that the scammers took Mr Tong’s
J J
particulars and registered the company using his name.
K K
Psychiatric Report
L L
M 40. On the urging of Mr Chang on behalf of Mr Tong, the court M
obtained a psychiatric report on Mr Tong.
N N
O 41. There was a narrative in the report on how Mr Tong got O
involved in the offence (sic):
P P
Q “6. … he searched for job at the Facebook. He was promised to Q
be paid HKD500 a day as salary. He was asked to open 2 bank
accounts which he later gave the details to the party who hired
R R
him. Tong claims he did not think too much about what they
used the bank accounts for. He says he got HKD2500 in total
S and was arrested 2 weeks later. Tong denies knowing the details S
on how the accounts were used.”
T T
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
B B
42. The opinion of the psychiatrist on Mr Tong was:
C C
“8. … Tong is diagnosed with Dissocial Personality Disorder
D and Paranoid Schizophrenia with residual symptoms. His D
mental condition is largely stable in custodial setting and
inpatient psychiatric treatment is not warranted at current
E juncture …” E
F F
Sentence
G G
43. It is noteworthy nothing in the psychiatric report supports the
H H
defence submission that Mr Tong’s mental illness exacerbated his
I vulnerability to being lured into an employment scam and therefore his I
culpability ought to become lower. In fact, there was nothing in the report
J J
to indicate he was lured into surrendering his two accounts.
K K
44. I further note that the amount of money he told the psychiatrist
L L
he received is somewhat different to what he admitted in the Amended
M Summary of Facts, namely $7,500 for selling the BOC account and $2,500 M
for selling the HSBC account.
N N
O 45. In the Amended Summary of Facts, Mr Tong further admitted O
that as per the Companies Registry records, he became a director of a
P P
limited company on 5 January 2021. This is contrary to the mitigation
Q claim that he refused to set up a company for a reward. Q
R R
46. I am not satisfied on a balance of probabilities that Mr Tong
S fell prey to an employment scam as he claimed. S
T T
U U
V V
- 11 -
A A
B B
47. Before sentencing Mr Tong, I have had regard to the
C principles enunciated in Secretary for Justice v Wan Kwok Keung [2012] 1 C
HKLRD 201, and HKSAR v Boma [2012] 2 HKLRD 33.
D D
E 48. This case has the following features. The total amount E
laundered was just short of $8.5 million. There were 40 to 50
F F
deposits/withdrawals spanning just over 5 months. There was no
G international element. Mr Tong did not appear to know anything about the G
predicate offence of fraud. Mr Tong’s role was to sell his two accounts to
H H
a stranger for other people’s use in return for a total reward of $10,000.
I I
49. I also note that Mr Tong has admitted he committed the two
J J
offences with the said stranger.
K K
50. Bearing in mind the circumstances of the present case and
L L
comparing them against the list of non-exhaustive features identified in
M Boma, and factoring in the element of joint enterprise, I adjudge an M
appropriate global starting point of sentence for the two offences to be 4 ½
N N
years’ imprisonment.
O O
51. Mr Tong pleaded guilty to the offences in good time. He shall
P P
be entitled to the customary 1/3 sentencing discount. There are no other
Q mitigating factors of weight to justify another sentence reduction. Q
R R
52. Mr Chang has no objection to the prosecution furnishing
S information in the form of a witness statement of CIP Li Yiu Nam dated S
18 July 2025 on the court under section 27(2) of OSCO, Cap 455. Mr
T T
U U
V V
- 12 -
A A
B B
Chang also has no objection to enhancement of sentence but urges the court
C not to enhance beyond the 30% mark. C
D D
53. The basis of the “enhancement application” are (a) prevalence
E of money laundering offence; and (b) the nature and extent of any harm, E
whether direct or indirect, caused to the community by recent occurrences
F F
of this offence.
G G
54. In Table A on page 5 of the statement, it can be seen that the
H H
use of (money laundering) stooge (Mr Tong is one such stooge) is
I increasing steadily in both figures and proportion from year 2020 to year I
2024. The first 6 months of year 2025 achieve a figure of 2,758 and a
J J
proportion of 72%. Using the mathematical method of extrapolation, the
K projected figure and proportion obtained for the whole of 2025 will be K
5,516 and 72% respectively. This will represent a drop from the
L L
corresponding figure and proportion of 7,883 and 75% for the year 2024.
M This drop is not substantial. M
N N
55. I am satisfied that the use of money laundering stooge and by
O implication the money laundering offence is still prevalent. O
P P
56. In Table B on page 6 of the statement, it can be seen that for
Q (local) Deception cases (detected with arrest) which involved subsequent Q
money laundering of the crime proceeds, the amount of reported losses
R R
went up from $552.88M in year 2020 to $2,143.41M in year 2024. The
S figure for the first 6 months of year 2025 was $370.50M which when S
projected for the whole of 2025 became $741M. This represents a
T T
significant drop from year 2024.
U U
V V
- 13 -
A A
B B
C 57. However, reported losses are not the only harm done to the C
community.
D D
E 58. The use of stooge accounts is another way in which the E
community can be harmed indirectly (more below). There has been an
F F
overall increase in the use of local stooge accounts under both local
G Deception cases (detected with arrest) and ML cases (ie overseas predicate G
offence with local money laundering or standalone money laundering with
H H
no identifiable predicate offence) (detected with arrest). The relevant
I figure went up from 845 cases in year 2020 to 3,675 cases in year 2024. I
The corresponding figure for the first 6 months of year 2025 was 511 which
J J
when projected for the whole of 2025 became 1,022. Although this
K represents a reduced figure from year 2024, it still is quite substantial. K
L L
59. CIP Li outlined in para 18 of his statement how the increase
M in number of stooge accounts can harm the Hong Kong community, as M
follows:
N N
O (a) It interferes with the normal operation of the banking O
system, having a negative effect on the reputation of
P P
Hong Kong as a well-known international financial hub;
Q Q
(b) It forms multiple layers of “shield” concealing the
R R
identity of the masterminds behind, making it difficult,
S if not impossible, for police to identify the masterminds S
behind;
T T
U U
V V
- 14 -
A A
B B
(c) It substantially facilitates the commission of crimes and
C in turn leads to more crimes being committed, as the C
masterminds could easily get away from their criminal
D D
liability;
E E
(d) It makes money laundering easier, which allows
F F
culprits to make use of their ill-gotten gains to extend
G their sphere to engage in a wider range of illegal G
activities;
H H
I (e) It means that law enforcement agencies have to put in I
more investigative efforts and resources; and
J J
K (f) It means that people with low income or less awareness K
of the consequences of selling their bank accounts are
L L
more likely to be lured by the culprits to take the risks
M of commission of crimes to surrender their accounts for M
monetary reward.
N N
O 60. I am satisfied that the extent of harm caused to the community O
by recent occurrences of the money laundering offence is still substantial.
P P
Q 61. I will therefore exercise the power under section 27(11) of Q
OSCO, Cap 455, to enhance the sentence of Mr Tong. I deem 20%
R R
enhancement to be sufficient in the circumstances of the statistics and of
S Mr Tong. S
T T
U U
V V
- 15 -
A A
B B
62. I will disregard any decimal places after calculation of the
C prison term in terms of months. C
D D
63. The resulting sentence is heavy when compared with Mr
E Tong’s past sentences but then again, he has never been convicted before E
of a money laundering offence. I am satisfied that the global sentence
F F
herein arrived at is not excessive in the overall circumstances of the
G offences and the offender. G
H H
64. I will impose individual sentences (after enhancement) for the
I two charges and make an appropriate order to arrive at the final global I
sentence.
J J
K (Mr Tong, please stand) K
L L
65. The sentence for Charge 1 is 40 months’ imprisonment.
M M
66. The sentence for Charge 2 is 38 months’ imprisonment.
N N
O 67. I order that 3 months of the sentence on Charge 2 are to run O
consecutively to the sentence on Charge 1, making a final aggregate
P P
sentence of 43 months’ imprisonment.
Q Q
R R
S ( Isaac Tam ) S
District Judge
T T
U U
V V
A A
B B
DCCC 998/2024
C [2025] HKDC 1510 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 998 OF 2024
F F
G ---------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
v
I TONG CHIN PANG I
----------------------------
J J
K Before: His Honour Judge Tam in Court K
Date: 1 September 2025
L L
Present: Ms Mo Kwok Ping Alison, Public Prosecutor, for HKSAR
M Mr Chang Peng Geoffrey, instructed by Henry Yu & M
Associates, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the
N N
defendant
O Offences: [1] – [2] Dealing with property known or believed to represent O
proceeds of an indictable offence (處理已知道或相信為代
P P
表從可公訴罪行的得益的財產)
Q Q
R --------------------------------------- R
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
S S
---------------------------------------
T T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
1. Mr Tong pleaded guilty before me to two charges of Dealing
C with property known or believed to represent proceeds of an indictable C
offence, contrary to section 25(1) and (3) of the Organized and Serious
D D
Crimes Ordinance, Cap 455, on a Charge Sheet as follows.
E E
2. Particulars of Charge 1 are that he, between 5 November 2020
F F
and 2 December 2020, both dates inclusive, in Hong Kong, together with
G a person unknown, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe that G
property namely a total sum of $5,478,264.50 Hong Kong currency in the
H H
bank account with The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation
I Limited, account number 634715981833, in whole or in part directly or I
indirectly represented any person’s proceeds of an indictable offence, dealt
J J
with the said property.
K K
3. Particulars of Charge 2 are that he, between 24 November
L L
2020 and 16 April 2021, both dates inclusive, in Hong Kong, together with
M a person unknown, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe that M
property namely a total sum of $3,012,704.50 Hong Kong currency in the
N N
bank account with Bank of China (Hong Kong) Limited, account number
O 01235810382396, in whole or in part directly or indirectly represented any O
person’s proceeds of an indictable offence, dealt with the said property.
P P
Q Facts admitted by Mr Tong Q
R R
4. In the first case, PW1 (female aged 78) was duped by
S scammers purporting to be Mainland PSB officers into handing over her S
online banking credentials. A total sum of about $82 million belonging to
T T
PW1 was remitted by the scammers to various bank accounts one of which
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
was Mr Tong’s bank account with HSBC, namely the bank account under
C Charge 1, which received sums totalling $5,477,554 in this regard between C
23 November and 2 December 2020 over 16 occasions.
D D
E 5. Between 5 November and 2 December 2020, the same E
account recorded a total deposit of $5,478,264.50 over 25 transactions and
F F
a total withdrawal of $5,478,186.60 over 25 occasions.
G G
6. Mr Tong was provided with bank statements sent to his
H H
reported residential address in Kwai Chung by HSBC.
I I
7. In the second case, PW2 was duped by an imposter with
J J
whom she fell in love into joining some bogus investment schemes. She
K remitted altogether $2,716,200 to various bank accounts one of which was K
Mr Tong’s bank account with Bank of China, ie the bank account under
L L
Charge 2, which received $1.5 million on one occasion on 11 December
M 2020. M
N N
8. Between 24 November 2020 and 16 April 2021, that BOC
O account recorded a total deposit of $3,012,704.50 over 17 transactions and O
a total withdrawal of $3,012,705.02 over 24 occasions.
P P
Q 9. Mr Tong was provided with bank statements by BOC. Q
R R
10. Funds flow analyses showed all the funds, once deposited into
S both accounts were siphoned off within the same day to their respective S
USD accounts or other people’s bank accounts.
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
11. Mr Tong was arrested on 15 January 2021 and 7 November
C 2023 in relation to the BOC account and the HSBC account respectively. C
Under caution, Mr Tong admitted selling the BOC bank account and the
D D
HSBC bank account to a stranger for a monetary reward of $7,500 and
E $2,500 respectively. E
F F
12. Companies Registry records show Mr Tong held directorship
G of a company called “Far-east digital outlet Limited” since 5 January 2021. G
H H
Criminal record
I I
13. Mr Tong has 24 previous convictions none similar. However,
J J
half of the convictions were related to either theft or other Theft Ordinance
K offences. A majority of the theft convictions were related to shoplifting. K
L L
Antecedents
M M
14. Mr Tong is aged 51 (47 at the time of the offences), educated
N N
to Secondary 3 level, unemployed.
O O
Mitigation
P P
Q 15. Mr Geoffrey Chang of counsel assigned by the Director of Q
Legal Aid mitigated on behalf of Mr Tong. The following is a summary
R R
of the mitigation submissions.
S S
16. Mr Tong was born in Hong Kong, unmarried. His father (81)
T T
and mother (90) are both retirees. Mr Tong was the only child of the family.
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
C 17. Mr Tong’s last occupation was as a warehouse clerk, for about C
5 years. Between 2003 and 2004, Mr Tong ceased work due to some
D D
mental issue. He is currently unemployed and receives CSSA.
E E
18. In the past, Mr Tong has had some mental issue.
F F
G 19. Around early November 2020, Mr Tong saw a Facebook job G
advertisement urgently recruiting an assistant for remote work with no
H H
experience required and offering a daily wage of $500. Mr Tong left his
I contact number. A “Mr Lau” called back, claiming to be from an HR I
company seeking an assistant to distribute salaries to employees and to
J J
verify attendance records. Mr Lau requested Mr Tong’s full banking
K details so the company could deposit funds into Mr Tong’s account for K
onward transfer to employees. He described the role as simple, short-hours,
L L
phone-based and work from home. He offered $2,500 upon account being
M set up and he urged Mr Tong to start immediately. M
N N
20. Mr Tong already held a BOC account. Following Mr Lau’s
O instructions, Mr Tong activated its online banking services. Following Mr O
Lau’s instructions, Mr Tong opened an HSBC account. Unaware of the
P P
scam (meaning the employment scam), Mr Tong provided all bank details
Q including account numbers, ATM cards, passwords, online banking Q
credentials, email, and phone number to Mr Lau who stated that the
R R
company needed transaction records to verify salary payments. Mr Lau
S later invited Mr Tong to “discuss work” at a hotel for a week. Mr Tong S
declined as he was subjected to mandatory night-stay order at a designated
T T
care-home as part of his mental treatment.
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
C 21. At an in-person meeting in Mong Kok, Mr Lau gave Mr Tong C
$2,500 and persuaded him to start a business together. Another “colleague”
D D
later made appointments to meet Mr Tong at an accounting firm, and later
E at Kwai Fong MTR Station. Mr Tong met with two men who offered E
$7,000 to him to set up a company and a corporate bank account. Mr Tong
F F
refused because he found the process complex and unsuitable for him.
G G
22. Days later, Mr Lau called Mr Tong, threatening to terminate
H H
his employment unless he opened the company accounts. After an
I argument, Mr Lau declared Mr Tong “fired” and stated that the two I
personal accounts be treated as “sold” to the company, and cut off contact.
J J
K 23. Mr Tong was arrested 3 days later. K
L L
24. Mr Chang assured the court that Mr Tong is guilty of the
M offences charged under the second limb of the mens rea requirement. M
N N
25. In HKSAR v Ho Shun Hsiung CACC 472/2009: money
O laundering of HK$4,150,000 with 5 charges, international element and O
foreign remittances. After guilty plea, 3 years’ imprisonment (global
P P
starting point: ~4.5 years).
Q Q
26. In HKSAR v Jain Nikhil and Anor [2007] 2 HKC 205:
R R
laundering of HK$6,600,000 with fraud proceeds, victim loss being
S HK$3,900,000. After guilty plea, 3 years and 4 months’ imprisonment. S
T T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
27. For Charge 1 (HK$5,478,264.50), the appropriate starting
C point should be around 4-4.5 years. For Charge 2 (HK$3,012,704.50), the C
appropriate starting point should be in the region of 3-4 years (~3.5 years).
D D
E 28. Mr Chang submitted there is no international element in the E
present case.
F F
G 29. In respect of sentence enhancement, Mr Chang has the G
following submissions.
H H
I 30. In the witness statement of CIP Li Yiu Nam dated 18 July I
2025, paras 14, 15 and 17(b) described circumstances which Mr Tong
J J
experienced, namely, he was a victim of an “employment scam”.
K K
31. Table B in the witness statement shows an upward trend in
L L
similar cases peaking in 2022.
M M
32. Mr Tong played the lowest-tier role: he was deceived into
N N
providing his bank accounts for fraudulent use under the guise of
O employment. Thus, the enhancement should apply at the lower range O
(20%-30%).
P P
Q 33. Mr Tong suffers from chronic schizophrenia (with symptoms Q
like auditory hallucinations) stemming from bipolar disorder. Over two
R R
decades, he underwent repeated long-term hospitalizations and has resided
S in a psychiatric nursing home for 9 years under medical order. His S
condition:
T T
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
(a) Renders him more susceptible to deception than
C mentally healthy individuals; and C
D D
(b) Impairs his ability to foresee consequences.
E E
34. Mr Chang requested the court to commission a psychiatric
F F
report to assess Mr Tong’s mental state and its impact on his culpability at
G the time of the offence (sic). Given Mr Tong’s condition, Mr Chang sought G
reduced culpability and a lower enhancement.
H H
I 35. Mr Tong pleaded guilty and is entitled to a one-third I
sentencing discount.
J J
K 36. Mr Chang submitted that Mr Tong’s role was minor; that he K
himself was a victim of fraud; that his mental illness exacerbated his
L L
vulnerability; that his culpability is thus relatively low. Mr Chang urged
M the court to: M
N N
(a) Order concurrent sentences; or
O O
(b) If consecutive sentences are imposed, set a low overall
P P
sentence commensurate with Mr Tong’s reduced
Q culpability. Q
R R
37. Mr Chang submitted on behalf of Mr Tong one mitigation
S letter written in Chinese by Mr Tong’s father. The contents generally are S
that the case has dragged on for 4 years causing the family members to
T T
suffer long-term worry, insomnia and depression; that Mr Tong’s mother
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
suffers long-term illness (medical history in English enclosed). The father
C asked that Mr Tong be dealt with leniently so the family can be reunited C
early.
D D
E 38. Having received the psychiatric report called for (more E
below), Mr Chang submitted that Mr Tong agreed to the contents which
F F
confirmed the psychiatric history of Mr Tong.
G G
39. When questioned by the court about Mr Tong’s claim in
H H
mitigation that he refused the scammers’ request to open a company which
I was contradicted by the Amended Summary of Facts para 8, Mr Chang, I
after taking instructions, submitted that the scammers took Mr Tong’s
J J
particulars and registered the company using his name.
K K
Psychiatric Report
L L
M 40. On the urging of Mr Chang on behalf of Mr Tong, the court M
obtained a psychiatric report on Mr Tong.
N N
O 41. There was a narrative in the report on how Mr Tong got O
involved in the offence (sic):
P P
Q “6. … he searched for job at the Facebook. He was promised to Q
be paid HKD500 a day as salary. He was asked to open 2 bank
accounts which he later gave the details to the party who hired
R R
him. Tong claims he did not think too much about what they
used the bank accounts for. He says he got HKD2500 in total
S and was arrested 2 weeks later. Tong denies knowing the details S
on how the accounts were used.”
T T
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
B B
42. The opinion of the psychiatrist on Mr Tong was:
C C
“8. … Tong is diagnosed with Dissocial Personality Disorder
D and Paranoid Schizophrenia with residual symptoms. His D
mental condition is largely stable in custodial setting and
inpatient psychiatric treatment is not warranted at current
E juncture …” E
F F
Sentence
G G
43. It is noteworthy nothing in the psychiatric report supports the
H H
defence submission that Mr Tong’s mental illness exacerbated his
I vulnerability to being lured into an employment scam and therefore his I
culpability ought to become lower. In fact, there was nothing in the report
J J
to indicate he was lured into surrendering his two accounts.
K K
44. I further note that the amount of money he told the psychiatrist
L L
he received is somewhat different to what he admitted in the Amended
M Summary of Facts, namely $7,500 for selling the BOC account and $2,500 M
for selling the HSBC account.
N N
O 45. In the Amended Summary of Facts, Mr Tong further admitted O
that as per the Companies Registry records, he became a director of a
P P
limited company on 5 January 2021. This is contrary to the mitigation
Q claim that he refused to set up a company for a reward. Q
R R
46. I am not satisfied on a balance of probabilities that Mr Tong
S fell prey to an employment scam as he claimed. S
T T
U U
V V
- 11 -
A A
B B
47. Before sentencing Mr Tong, I have had regard to the
C principles enunciated in Secretary for Justice v Wan Kwok Keung [2012] 1 C
HKLRD 201, and HKSAR v Boma [2012] 2 HKLRD 33.
D D
E 48. This case has the following features. The total amount E
laundered was just short of $8.5 million. There were 40 to 50
F F
deposits/withdrawals spanning just over 5 months. There was no
G international element. Mr Tong did not appear to know anything about the G
predicate offence of fraud. Mr Tong’s role was to sell his two accounts to
H H
a stranger for other people’s use in return for a total reward of $10,000.
I I
49. I also note that Mr Tong has admitted he committed the two
J J
offences with the said stranger.
K K
50. Bearing in mind the circumstances of the present case and
L L
comparing them against the list of non-exhaustive features identified in
M Boma, and factoring in the element of joint enterprise, I adjudge an M
appropriate global starting point of sentence for the two offences to be 4 ½
N N
years’ imprisonment.
O O
51. Mr Tong pleaded guilty to the offences in good time. He shall
P P
be entitled to the customary 1/3 sentencing discount. There are no other
Q mitigating factors of weight to justify another sentence reduction. Q
R R
52. Mr Chang has no objection to the prosecution furnishing
S information in the form of a witness statement of CIP Li Yiu Nam dated S
18 July 2025 on the court under section 27(2) of OSCO, Cap 455. Mr
T T
U U
V V
- 12 -
A A
B B
Chang also has no objection to enhancement of sentence but urges the court
C not to enhance beyond the 30% mark. C
D D
53. The basis of the “enhancement application” are (a) prevalence
E of money laundering offence; and (b) the nature and extent of any harm, E
whether direct or indirect, caused to the community by recent occurrences
F F
of this offence.
G G
54. In Table A on page 5 of the statement, it can be seen that the
H H
use of (money laundering) stooge (Mr Tong is one such stooge) is
I increasing steadily in both figures and proportion from year 2020 to year I
2024. The first 6 months of year 2025 achieve a figure of 2,758 and a
J J
proportion of 72%. Using the mathematical method of extrapolation, the
K projected figure and proportion obtained for the whole of 2025 will be K
5,516 and 72% respectively. This will represent a drop from the
L L
corresponding figure and proportion of 7,883 and 75% for the year 2024.
M This drop is not substantial. M
N N
55. I am satisfied that the use of money laundering stooge and by
O implication the money laundering offence is still prevalent. O
P P
56. In Table B on page 6 of the statement, it can be seen that for
Q (local) Deception cases (detected with arrest) which involved subsequent Q
money laundering of the crime proceeds, the amount of reported losses
R R
went up from $552.88M in year 2020 to $2,143.41M in year 2024. The
S figure for the first 6 months of year 2025 was $370.50M which when S
projected for the whole of 2025 became $741M. This represents a
T T
significant drop from year 2024.
U U
V V
- 13 -
A A
B B
C 57. However, reported losses are not the only harm done to the C
community.
D D
E 58. The use of stooge accounts is another way in which the E
community can be harmed indirectly (more below). There has been an
F F
overall increase in the use of local stooge accounts under both local
G Deception cases (detected with arrest) and ML cases (ie overseas predicate G
offence with local money laundering or standalone money laundering with
H H
no identifiable predicate offence) (detected with arrest). The relevant
I figure went up from 845 cases in year 2020 to 3,675 cases in year 2024. I
The corresponding figure for the first 6 months of year 2025 was 511 which
J J
when projected for the whole of 2025 became 1,022. Although this
K represents a reduced figure from year 2024, it still is quite substantial. K
L L
59. CIP Li outlined in para 18 of his statement how the increase
M in number of stooge accounts can harm the Hong Kong community, as M
follows:
N N
O (a) It interferes with the normal operation of the banking O
system, having a negative effect on the reputation of
P P
Hong Kong as a well-known international financial hub;
Q Q
(b) It forms multiple layers of “shield” concealing the
R R
identity of the masterminds behind, making it difficult,
S if not impossible, for police to identify the masterminds S
behind;
T T
U U
V V
- 14 -
A A
B B
(c) It substantially facilitates the commission of crimes and
C in turn leads to more crimes being committed, as the C
masterminds could easily get away from their criminal
D D
liability;
E E
(d) It makes money laundering easier, which allows
F F
culprits to make use of their ill-gotten gains to extend
G their sphere to engage in a wider range of illegal G
activities;
H H
I (e) It means that law enforcement agencies have to put in I
more investigative efforts and resources; and
J J
K (f) It means that people with low income or less awareness K
of the consequences of selling their bank accounts are
L L
more likely to be lured by the culprits to take the risks
M of commission of crimes to surrender their accounts for M
monetary reward.
N N
O 60. I am satisfied that the extent of harm caused to the community O
by recent occurrences of the money laundering offence is still substantial.
P P
Q 61. I will therefore exercise the power under section 27(11) of Q
OSCO, Cap 455, to enhance the sentence of Mr Tong. I deem 20%
R R
enhancement to be sufficient in the circumstances of the statistics and of
S Mr Tong. S
T T
U U
V V
- 15 -
A A
B B
62. I will disregard any decimal places after calculation of the
C prison term in terms of months. C
D D
63. The resulting sentence is heavy when compared with Mr
E Tong’s past sentences but then again, he has never been convicted before E
of a money laundering offence. I am satisfied that the global sentence
F F
herein arrived at is not excessive in the overall circumstances of the
G offences and the offender. G
H H
64. I will impose individual sentences (after enhancement) for the
I two charges and make an appropriate order to arrive at the final global I
sentence.
J J
K (Mr Tong, please stand) K
L L
65. The sentence for Charge 1 is 40 months’ imprisonment.
M M
66. The sentence for Charge 2 is 38 months’ imprisonment.
N N
O 67. I order that 3 months of the sentence on Charge 2 are to run O
consecutively to the sentence on Charge 1, making a final aggregate
P P
sentence of 43 months’ imprisonment.
Q Q
R R
S ( Isaac Tam ) S
District Judge
T T
U U
V V