A A
B B
DCCC 479/2025
C [2025] HKDC 2005 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 479 OF 2025
F F
G ———————— G
HKSAR
H H
v
I ROBIAH SITI I
————————
J J
K Before: His Honour Judge Tam in Court K
Date: 25 November 2025
L L
Present: Ms Sham Wing Yan Jessie, Senior Public Prosecutor, and Mr
M Lee Wing Yin Wayne, Public Prosecutor, for HKSAR M
Ms Herbert Elizabeth Anne, Counsel instructed by Messrs
N N
Morley Chow Seto, assigned by DLA
O Offences: [1] & [2] Dealing with property known or believed to O
represent proceeds of an indictable offence (處理已知道或相
P P
信為代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. Ms Robiah pleaded guilty before me to two charges of
C Dealing with property known or believed to represent proceeds of an C
indictable offence, contrary to section 25(1) and (3) of the Organized and
D D
Serious Crimes Ordinance, Cap 455.
E E
2. Particulars are that she, between A and B, both dates
F F
inclusive, in Hong Kong, together with a person known as “Aning”,
G knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe that property, namely a G
total sum of C Hong Kong currency in the bank account with D, account
H H
number E, in whole or in part directly or indirectly represented any
I person’s proceeds of an indictable offence, dealt with the said property. I
J J
3. For Charge 1, A is 1 February 2023; B is 13 February 2023;
K C is $84,800; D is The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation K
Limited; E is 027-827666-833.
L L
M 4. For Charge 2, A is 21 July 2023; B is 31 July 2023; C is M
$527,152.78; D is Hang Seng Bank Limited; E is 391-657418-668.
N N
O Facts admitted by Ms Robiah O
P P
5. At all material times, Ms Robiah was the sole account holder
Q Q
of :-
R
(a) A personal savings account numbered 027-827666-833 R
(“Account 1”) of the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking
S S
Corporation Limited; and
T T
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
(b) A personal savings account numbered 391-657418-668
C (“Account 2”) of the Hang Seng Bank Limited. C
D D
6. Ms Poon (PW1) fell for a romance scam. She got acquainted
E with a fraudster on Instagram. The fraudster claimed he had sent a gift to E
PW1 but a purported courier requested PW1 to pay HKD19,500. PW1
F F
complied and sent the sum via two transactions to Account 1 on 13
G February 2023. G
H H
7. Ms He (PW2) also fell for a romance scam. She got
I acquainted with a fraudster on Bumble. The fraudster claimed that his bank I
account with a substantial balance was frozen and he requested PW2 to
J J
lend him money. PW2 lost a total of HKD7,210,630.08, of which 2 sums
K totaling HKD355,950 were sent to Account 2 on 28 July 2023 and 31 July K
2023.
L L
M Charge 1 (Account 1) M
N N
8. On 3 September 2022, Ms Robiah opened Account 1 in her
O name. She reported a phone number subscribed by her (“Reported O
Number”) for the account.
P P
Q Q
9. Between 1 and 13 February 2023, there was a spike in
R
transactions in Account 1. During the period:- R
S S
(a) A total of 7 deposits amounting to HKD84,800 were
T
deposited into Account 1; T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
(b) A total of 13 withdrawals amounting to HKD84,800
C were withdrawn from Account 1 through ATM; C
D D
(c) After deposits were made, the funds accumulated were
E quickly dissipated on the same day or shortly E
afterwards; and
F F
G (d) Account 1 had an opening balance of HKD100 as at 1 G
February 2023 and a closing balance of HKD100 as at
H H
13 February 2023.
I I
10. At all material times, Account 1 was being used as a
J J
temporary repository of funds.
K K
11. On 21 July 2023, Ms Robiah was arrested for her dealings
L L
with Account 1. During a cautioned interview, Ms Robiah admitted
M lending Account 1 to a person named Aning by passing the ATM card to M
her around a month after account opening; that she trusted Aning as they
N N
were both Indonesians; that she tried but failed to reach Aning upon
O receiving a notification from the bank concerning a HKD50,000 deposit. O
P P
Charge 2 (Account 2)
Q Q
R
12. On 17 September 2022, Ms Robiah opened Account 2 in her R
name. She also reported the Reported Number for Account 2.
S S
T
13. Between 21 and 31 July 2023, there was a spike in T
transactions in Account 2. During the period:-
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
(a) A total of 20 deposits amounting to HKD572,152.78
C were deposited into Account 2; C
D D
(b) A total of 27 withdrawals amounting to
E HKD391,255.94 were withdrawn from Account 2; E
except for one cash withdrawal of HKD6,155.94 on 31
F F
July 2024, all withdrawals were made through ATM;
G G
(c) After deposits were made, the funds accumulated were
H H
quickly dissipated on the same day or shortly
I afterwards (substantial balance remained in Account 2 I
since 29 July 2023);
J J
K (d) Account 2 had an opening balance of HKD100 as at 21 K
July 2023 and a closing balance of HKD180,996.84 as
L L
at 31 July 2023; and
M M
(e) On 1 November 2023, police issued a letter of no
N N
consent over the HKD181,386.44 balance in Account
O 2. O
P P
14. At all material times, Account 2 was being used as a
Q Q
temporary repository of funds.
R R
15. On 27 May 2024, Ms Robiah was arrested for her dealings
S S
with Account 2. During a VRI, Ms Robiah admitted she lent Account 2 to
T
Aning in November 2022 as she was unable to repay a debt to Aning; that T
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
she later tried to find Aning but the latter had returned to Indonesia and
C asked Ms Robiah to cancel Account 2. C
D D
16. Ms Robiah was in Hong Kong at all material times.
E E
Criminal record
F F
G 17. Ms Robiah has a clear record in Hong Kong. G
H H
Antecedents
I I
18. Ms Robiah is aged 44 (41-42 at the time of the offences),
J J
educated up to junior high school level in Indonesia, has been a domestic
K helper in Hong Kong since January 2019 and was so at the time of arrest. K
Ms Robiah is divorced. Her mother passed away in 2023. Her son (22) is
L L
living with her father (70) in Indonesia.
M M
Mitigation
N N
O 19. Ms Elizabeth Herbert of counsel assigned by the Director of O
Legal Aid mitigated on behalf of Ms Robiah. The following is a summary
P P
of the mitigation submissions.
Q Q
R
20. Ms Robiah is an Indonesian national. She was educated to R
Form 3 level. She came to Hong Kong to work as a domestic helper in
S S
2019. She changed employer once in 2023. Prior to her arrest, she was the
T
sole bread winner of the family. T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
21. Ms Robiah has a clear record.
C C
22. In the second half of 2022, Ms Robiah’s mother fell ill. The
D D
medical expenses were beyond Ms Robiah’s means. She therefore
E borrowed $2,000 from Aning, an Indonesian woman who was working for E
a domestic helper agency. Ms Robiah failed to repay the loan; Aning
F F
suggested she hand over her ATM card relating to Account 1 until she
G could repay the loan. Later, Ms Robiah required a second loan of $2,000. G
Aning did the same in relation to Account 2.
H H
I 23. It was submitted that Ms Robiah should be treated as a stooge I
account holder, ie someone who turned over the use of her accounts to
J J
another. There is no evidence to suggest that Ms Robiah would have
K known the nature of the predicate offence or that there was an international K
element.
L L
M 24. The Court of Appeal made remarks in HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi M
[2010] 5 HKLRD 545, at para 9, in relation to the factors to be taken into
N N
account in sentencing for this type of offence.
O O
25. The Court of Appeal also made observations on culpability
P P
and aggravating features in HKSAR v Boma [2012] 2 HKLRD 33 at para
Q Q
40.
R R
26. Hsu Yu Yi was subsequently summarized in Secretary for
S S
Justice v Wan Kwok Keung [2012] 1 HKLRD 201 at para 15 as follows:
T T
“15. In HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] 5 HKLRD 545, Cheung JA
U set out the amounts of money involved and the sentences passed U
V V
-8-
A A
B in a number of “money laundering” cases. The sentencing B
starting point is 3 years or so where the “black money” involved
C is between $1 million and $2 million; 4 years or so where it is C
between $3 million and $6 million; and could be over 5 years
where it is above $10 million.”
D D
27. The two charges took place over a relatively short time period
E E
(each less than 2 weeks). Together, the total amount involved was less than
F F
one million dollars. A sum of HK$183,327.21 is still in the HSB account
G
and will be recovered. Ms Robiah has consented to a confiscation order in G
respect thereof. Ms Robiah was not the main perpetrator of the money
H H
laundering scheme, nor did she recruit people to conduct money
I laundering. Her role was as a stooge account holder. I
J J
28. It was submitted that because of her limited education
K background and her relatively low level of culpability, this case is likely to K
be one where Ms Robiah was taken advantage of by Aning. The court is
L L
asked to take into account her clear record, her good employment record.
M The court is urged to note the limited reward she received from the M
offences, the likelihood of her not being able to work again in Hong Kong,
N N
and the hardship in being incarcerated away from her family.
O O
29. Based on the authorities, it was submitted that the starting
P P
point should be no more than 3 years. Ms Robiah pleaded guilty in time
Q and 1/3 sentencing discount is asked for. Q
R R
30. Ms Herbert invited the court to impose a lenient sentence on
S Ms Robiah. S
T T
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
31. Ms Herbert submitted on behalf of Ms Robiah two mitigation
C letters written respectively by Ms Robiah’s ex-employer in Hong Kong and C
her son in Indonesia, with the latter letter having an English translation.
D D
The contents generally are that Ms Robiah was a trustworthy and
E responsible employee; that she has expressed her regret for the crime she E
committed; that her son misses her very much and wishes her an early
F F
return home.
G G
Sentence
H H
I 32. Money laundering is a serious offence. A deterrent sentence I
is always called for.
J J
K 33. I bear in mind the short duration of the two offences, the K
relatively small amounts laundered, the total number of transactions, Ms
L L
Robiah’s limited role and knowledge (including lack of evidence of
M knowledge of the predicate offences of deception), the meagre rewards Ms M
Robiah in effect received, and her consent to confiscation of the remaining
N N
balance of Account 2. I also note there is no evidence of international
O element/dimension. In light of all these factors, I will accede to the O
submission that a lower starting point be adopted for the two offences.
P P
Q 34. For Charge 1, I will adopt a starting point of 24 months’ Q
R
imprisonment. R
S S
35. For Charge 2, I will adopt a starting point of 30 months’
T
imprisonment. T
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
B B
36. Ms Robiah pleaded guilty to the charges in good time. She
C shall be given the full 1/3 sentencing discount. There are no other C
mitigating factors of weight to justify another sentence reduction.
D D
E 37. The two offences, though of the same nature, were committed E
at different times, and ought, for that reason, to attract consecutive
F F
sentences. However, I will bear in mind the totality principle when
G determining how to combine the two sentences in order to form one final G
sentence.
H H
I (Ms Robiah, please stand) I
J J
38. For Charge 1, the sentence is 16 months’ imprisonment.
K K
39. For Charge 2, the sentence is 20 months’ imprisonment.
L L
M 40. I order 2 months of the sentence on Charge 1 to run M
consecutively to the sentence on Charge 2, forming an aggregate sentence
N N
of 22 months’ imprisonment.
O O
P P
Q ( Isaac Tam ) Q
District Judge
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
A A
B B
DCCC 479/2025
C [2025] HKDC 2005 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 479 OF 2025
F F
G ———————— G
HKSAR
H H
v
I ROBIAH SITI I
————————
J J
K Before: His Honour Judge Tam in Court K
Date: 25 November 2025
L L
Present: Ms Sham Wing Yan Jessie, Senior Public Prosecutor, and Mr
M Lee Wing Yin Wayne, Public Prosecutor, for HKSAR M
Ms Herbert Elizabeth Anne, Counsel instructed by Messrs
N N
Morley Chow Seto, assigned by DLA
O Offences: [1] & [2] Dealing with property known or believed to O
represent proceeds of an indictable offence (處理已知道或相
P P
信為代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. Ms Robiah pleaded guilty before me to two charges of
C Dealing with property known or believed to represent proceeds of an C
indictable offence, contrary to section 25(1) and (3) of the Organized and
D D
Serious Crimes Ordinance, Cap 455.
E E
2. Particulars are that she, between A and B, both dates
F F
inclusive, in Hong Kong, together with a person known as “Aning”,
G knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe that property, namely a G
total sum of C Hong Kong currency in the bank account with D, account
H H
number E, in whole or in part directly or indirectly represented any
I person’s proceeds of an indictable offence, dealt with the said property. I
J J
3. For Charge 1, A is 1 February 2023; B is 13 February 2023;
K C is $84,800; D is The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation K
Limited; E is 027-827666-833.
L L
M 4. For Charge 2, A is 21 July 2023; B is 31 July 2023; C is M
$527,152.78; D is Hang Seng Bank Limited; E is 391-657418-668.
N N
O Facts admitted by Ms Robiah O
P P
5. At all material times, Ms Robiah was the sole account holder
Q Q
of :-
R
(a) A personal savings account numbered 027-827666-833 R
(“Account 1”) of the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking
S S
Corporation Limited; and
T T
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
(b) A personal savings account numbered 391-657418-668
C (“Account 2”) of the Hang Seng Bank Limited. C
D D
6. Ms Poon (PW1) fell for a romance scam. She got acquainted
E with a fraudster on Instagram. The fraudster claimed he had sent a gift to E
PW1 but a purported courier requested PW1 to pay HKD19,500. PW1
F F
complied and sent the sum via two transactions to Account 1 on 13
G February 2023. G
H H
7. Ms He (PW2) also fell for a romance scam. She got
I acquainted with a fraudster on Bumble. The fraudster claimed that his bank I
account with a substantial balance was frozen and he requested PW2 to
J J
lend him money. PW2 lost a total of HKD7,210,630.08, of which 2 sums
K totaling HKD355,950 were sent to Account 2 on 28 July 2023 and 31 July K
2023.
L L
M Charge 1 (Account 1) M
N N
8. On 3 September 2022, Ms Robiah opened Account 1 in her
O name. She reported a phone number subscribed by her (“Reported O
Number”) for the account.
P P
Q Q
9. Between 1 and 13 February 2023, there was a spike in
R
transactions in Account 1. During the period:- R
S S
(a) A total of 7 deposits amounting to HKD84,800 were
T
deposited into Account 1; T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
(b) A total of 13 withdrawals amounting to HKD84,800
C were withdrawn from Account 1 through ATM; C
D D
(c) After deposits were made, the funds accumulated were
E quickly dissipated on the same day or shortly E
afterwards; and
F F
G (d) Account 1 had an opening balance of HKD100 as at 1 G
February 2023 and a closing balance of HKD100 as at
H H
13 February 2023.
I I
10. At all material times, Account 1 was being used as a
J J
temporary repository of funds.
K K
11. On 21 July 2023, Ms Robiah was arrested for her dealings
L L
with Account 1. During a cautioned interview, Ms Robiah admitted
M lending Account 1 to a person named Aning by passing the ATM card to M
her around a month after account opening; that she trusted Aning as they
N N
were both Indonesians; that she tried but failed to reach Aning upon
O receiving a notification from the bank concerning a HKD50,000 deposit. O
P P
Charge 2 (Account 2)
Q Q
R
12. On 17 September 2022, Ms Robiah opened Account 2 in her R
name. She also reported the Reported Number for Account 2.
S S
T
13. Between 21 and 31 July 2023, there was a spike in T
transactions in Account 2. During the period:-
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
(a) A total of 20 deposits amounting to HKD572,152.78
C were deposited into Account 2; C
D D
(b) A total of 27 withdrawals amounting to
E HKD391,255.94 were withdrawn from Account 2; E
except for one cash withdrawal of HKD6,155.94 on 31
F F
July 2024, all withdrawals were made through ATM;
G G
(c) After deposits were made, the funds accumulated were
H H
quickly dissipated on the same day or shortly
I afterwards (substantial balance remained in Account 2 I
since 29 July 2023);
J J
K (d) Account 2 had an opening balance of HKD100 as at 21 K
July 2023 and a closing balance of HKD180,996.84 as
L L
at 31 July 2023; and
M M
(e) On 1 November 2023, police issued a letter of no
N N
consent over the HKD181,386.44 balance in Account
O 2. O
P P
14. At all material times, Account 2 was being used as a
Q Q
temporary repository of funds.
R R
15. On 27 May 2024, Ms Robiah was arrested for her dealings
S S
with Account 2. During a VRI, Ms Robiah admitted she lent Account 2 to
T
Aning in November 2022 as she was unable to repay a debt to Aning; that T
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
she later tried to find Aning but the latter had returned to Indonesia and
C asked Ms Robiah to cancel Account 2. C
D D
16. Ms Robiah was in Hong Kong at all material times.
E E
Criminal record
F F
G 17. Ms Robiah has a clear record in Hong Kong. G
H H
Antecedents
I I
18. Ms Robiah is aged 44 (41-42 at the time of the offences),
J J
educated up to junior high school level in Indonesia, has been a domestic
K helper in Hong Kong since January 2019 and was so at the time of arrest. K
Ms Robiah is divorced. Her mother passed away in 2023. Her son (22) is
L L
living with her father (70) in Indonesia.
M M
Mitigation
N N
O 19. Ms Elizabeth Herbert of counsel assigned by the Director of O
Legal Aid mitigated on behalf of Ms Robiah. The following is a summary
P P
of the mitigation submissions.
Q Q
R
20. Ms Robiah is an Indonesian national. She was educated to R
Form 3 level. She came to Hong Kong to work as a domestic helper in
S S
2019. She changed employer once in 2023. Prior to her arrest, she was the
T
sole bread winner of the family. T
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
21. Ms Robiah has a clear record.
C C
22. In the second half of 2022, Ms Robiah’s mother fell ill. The
D D
medical expenses were beyond Ms Robiah’s means. She therefore
E borrowed $2,000 from Aning, an Indonesian woman who was working for E
a domestic helper agency. Ms Robiah failed to repay the loan; Aning
F F
suggested she hand over her ATM card relating to Account 1 until she
G could repay the loan. Later, Ms Robiah required a second loan of $2,000. G
Aning did the same in relation to Account 2.
H H
I 23. It was submitted that Ms Robiah should be treated as a stooge I
account holder, ie someone who turned over the use of her accounts to
J J
another. There is no evidence to suggest that Ms Robiah would have
K known the nature of the predicate offence or that there was an international K
element.
L L
M 24. The Court of Appeal made remarks in HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi M
[2010] 5 HKLRD 545, at para 9, in relation to the factors to be taken into
N N
account in sentencing for this type of offence.
O O
25. The Court of Appeal also made observations on culpability
P P
and aggravating features in HKSAR v Boma [2012] 2 HKLRD 33 at para
Q Q
40.
R R
26. Hsu Yu Yi was subsequently summarized in Secretary for
S S
Justice v Wan Kwok Keung [2012] 1 HKLRD 201 at para 15 as follows:
T T
“15. In HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] 5 HKLRD 545, Cheung JA
U set out the amounts of money involved and the sentences passed U
V V
-8-
A A
B in a number of “money laundering” cases. The sentencing B
starting point is 3 years or so where the “black money” involved
C is between $1 million and $2 million; 4 years or so where it is C
between $3 million and $6 million; and could be over 5 years
where it is above $10 million.”
D D
27. The two charges took place over a relatively short time period
E E
(each less than 2 weeks). Together, the total amount involved was less than
F F
one million dollars. A sum of HK$183,327.21 is still in the HSB account
G
and will be recovered. Ms Robiah has consented to a confiscation order in G
respect thereof. Ms Robiah was not the main perpetrator of the money
H H
laundering scheme, nor did she recruit people to conduct money
I laundering. Her role was as a stooge account holder. I
J J
28. It was submitted that because of her limited education
K background and her relatively low level of culpability, this case is likely to K
be one where Ms Robiah was taken advantage of by Aning. The court is
L L
asked to take into account her clear record, her good employment record.
M The court is urged to note the limited reward she received from the M
offences, the likelihood of her not being able to work again in Hong Kong,
N N
and the hardship in being incarcerated away from her family.
O O
29. Based on the authorities, it was submitted that the starting
P P
point should be no more than 3 years. Ms Robiah pleaded guilty in time
Q and 1/3 sentencing discount is asked for. Q
R R
30. Ms Herbert invited the court to impose a lenient sentence on
S Ms Robiah. S
T T
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
31. Ms Herbert submitted on behalf of Ms Robiah two mitigation
C letters written respectively by Ms Robiah’s ex-employer in Hong Kong and C
her son in Indonesia, with the latter letter having an English translation.
D D
The contents generally are that Ms Robiah was a trustworthy and
E responsible employee; that she has expressed her regret for the crime she E
committed; that her son misses her very much and wishes her an early
F F
return home.
G G
Sentence
H H
I 32. Money laundering is a serious offence. A deterrent sentence I
is always called for.
J J
K 33. I bear in mind the short duration of the two offences, the K
relatively small amounts laundered, the total number of transactions, Ms
L L
Robiah’s limited role and knowledge (including lack of evidence of
M knowledge of the predicate offences of deception), the meagre rewards Ms M
Robiah in effect received, and her consent to confiscation of the remaining
N N
balance of Account 2. I also note there is no evidence of international
O element/dimension. In light of all these factors, I will accede to the O
submission that a lower starting point be adopted for the two offences.
P P
Q 34. For Charge 1, I will adopt a starting point of 24 months’ Q
R
imprisonment. R
S S
35. For Charge 2, I will adopt a starting point of 30 months’
T
imprisonment. T
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
B B
36. Ms Robiah pleaded guilty to the charges in good time. She
C shall be given the full 1/3 sentencing discount. There are no other C
mitigating factors of weight to justify another sentence reduction.
D D
E 37. The two offences, though of the same nature, were committed E
at different times, and ought, for that reason, to attract consecutive
F F
sentences. However, I will bear in mind the totality principle when
G determining how to combine the two sentences in order to form one final G
sentence.
H H
I (Ms Robiah, please stand) I
J J
38. For Charge 1, the sentence is 16 months’ imprisonment.
K K
39. For Charge 2, the sentence is 20 months’ imprisonment.
L L
M 40. I order 2 months of the sentence on Charge 1 to run M
consecutively to the sentence on Charge 2, forming an aggregate sentence
N N
of 22 months’ imprisonment.
O O
P P
Q ( Isaac Tam ) Q
District Judge
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V