HCCC414/2024

### 案件基本資料 - 案件名稱：HKSAR v Au Chi-ming - 法院：高等法院原訟法庭 (CFI) - 法官：Barnes J - 判決日期：2025年10月15日 ### 案情摘要 被告 Au Chi-ming 為一名破產的倉庫工人，負責照顧其 90 歲臥床的父親 APK。由於面臨沉重的債務壓力（約 25 萬港元）及照顧壓力，被告於 2023 年 8 月 4 日凌晨在臥室內燒炭企圖自殺，並意圖讓父親一同死亡，認為若自己不在，無人能照顧父親。最終兩人獲救，父親後因肺炎去世。 ### 核心法律爭議 本案的核心 legal issue 在於如何對企圖謀殺 (attempted murder) 的罪行定刑。控方主張應遵循 HKSAR v Cheung Chu Kong 的原則，強調社會對此類罪行的憎惡 (abhorrence) 及威懾 (deterrence) 作用；辯方則強調本案屬悲劇性質，被告出於對父親的愛而非恨，且其心理狀態存在缺陷，請求降低起點刑期。 ### 判決理由 法官在定刑時平衡了兩項 sentencing principles：一是標記社會對此類罪行的憎惡，二是威懾潛在犯罪者。法官考慮到被告的 psychological profile（缺乏壓力管理能力及認知靈活性）以及其在自殺失敗後嘗試搜尋急救資訊以救父親的行為，認為本案屬悲劇性質，故將 starting point 定為 6 年。 ### 引用案例與條文 引用 HKSAR v Cheung Chu Kong 確立的定刑原則，即必須體現社會的憎惡感並達到威懾效果，即使受害者原諒或被告動機非惡意，上述原則仍具有優先地位。 ### 裁決與命令 被告承認企圖謀殺罪名成立。法官裁定起點刑期為 6 年，因被告在最早機會下認罪 (pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity)，獲享三分之一的折扣，最終判處監禁 4 年。 ### 判決啟示 本案顯示法院在處理涉及家庭照顧壓力及心理健康問題的企圖謀殺案時，雖堅持威懾原則，但會將被告的心理評估報告 (psychologist report) 及事後補救行為作為減刑考慮。 --- ### 免責聲明 本摘要由人工智能自動生成，內容可能存在錯誤或遺漏，僅供參考，不構成法律意見。如需法律建議，請諮詢合資格律師。### Case Details - Case Name: HKSAR v Au Chi-ming - Court: Court of First Instance (CFI) - Judge: Barnes J - Date of Judgment: 15 October 2025 ### Factual Background The defendant, a bankrupt warehouse worker and sole carer for his 90-year-old bedridden father (APK), attempted a murder-suicide by burning charcoal in their shared bedroom on 4 August 2023. Driven by severe indebtedness and caregiving stress, the defendant believed his father would have no one to care for him if the defendant died. Both survived the attempt, though the father later died of unrelated causes. ### Key Legal Issues The primary issue was the appropriate sentence for attempted murder. The prosecution emphasized the need for societal abhorrence and deterrence. The defense argued for a lower starting point, citing the tragic nature of the case, the defendant's lack of malice (acting out of love), and his psychological deficits in stress management. ### Ratio Decidendi The judge applied two sentencing principles: marking society's abhorrence of such crimes and deterring others. While acknowledging the planning involved, the judge considered the defendant's psychological profile (limited cognitive flexibility) and his subsequent efforts to search for first-aid treatment for his father, leading to a starting point of 6 years. ### Key Precedents & Statutes HKSAR v Cheung Chu Kong was cited to establish that the need for deterrence and societal repugnance typically outweighs the forgiveness of victims or the specific tragic circumstances of the perpetrator. ### Decision & Orders The defendant pleaded guilty to attempted murder. The judge set a starting point of 6 years, applied a one-third discount for the early guilty plea, and sentenced the defendant to 4 years' imprisonment. ### Key Takeaways The judgment highlights the court's willingness to integrate clinical psychologist reports into sentencing to understand a defendant's maladaptive problem-solving skills, though the gravity of attempted murder still necessitates a significant custodial sentence. --- ### Disclaimer This summary is AI-generated and may contain errors or omissions. It is for reference only and does not constitute legal advice. Please consult a qualified lawyer for professional legal advice.