DCCC1479/2024
A A
B B
DCCC 1479/2024
C [2025] HKDC 2098 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 1479 OF 2024
F F
G ----------------------------------------------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
V
I ACOSTA LYNIE BIBAL I
----------------------------------------------------------------
J J
K Before: Deputy District Judge Edward Wong in Court K
Date: 8 December 2025
L L
Present: Ms HERBERT Elizabeth Anne, Counsel on fiat, for HKSAR
M Mr RAFFELL, Andrew J., instructed by Boase, Cohen & M
Colins, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the
N N
defendant
O Offences: [1] - [3] Dealing with property known or believed to represent O
proceeds of an indictable offence
P P
Q Q
---------------------------------------
R R
REASONS FOR VERDICT
S --------------------------------------- S
T T
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
A. Overview
C C
1. The Defendant (“D”) is charged with three charges of dealing
D D
with property known or believed to represent proceeds of an indictable
E offence, contrary to section 25(1) and (3) of the Organized and Serious E
Crimes Ordinance, Cap. 455:
F F
G Charge 1: between 26 March 2023 and 9 May 2023 in Hong G
Kong, together with Jane Corpuz (“Jane”) and other persons
H H
unknown, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe
I that property, namely HK$8,597,833.36 1 in the bank account I
with Mox Bank Limited (“MB”), account number 389-
J J
74961515645 (“Charge 1 Account”), in whole or in part
K directly or indirectly represented any person’s proceeds of an K
indictable offence, dealt with the said property.
L L
M Charge 2: between 26 and 31 March 2023 in Hong Kong, M
together with Jane and other persons unknown, knowing or
N N
having reasonable grounds to believe that property, namely
O $92,940.08 in the bank account with the Standard Chartered O
Bank (Hong Kong) Limited (“SCB”), account number 959-8-
P P
670206-1 (“Charge 2 Account”), in whole or in part directly
Q or indirectly represented any person’s proceeds of an Q
indictable offence, dealt with the said property.
R R
S S
T T
1
All currencies hereinafter are Hong Kong dollars.
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
Charge 3: between 26 and 31 March 2023 in Hong Kong,
C together with Jane and other persons unknown, knowing or C
having reasonable grounds to believe that property, namely
D D
$45,100.78 in the bank account with The Hongkong and
E Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited (“HSBC”), account E
number 166-872887-833 (“Charge 3 Account”), in whole or
F F
in part directly or indirectly represented any person’s
G proceeds of an indictable offence, dealt with the said property. G
H H
2. Parties agreed to submit, inter alia, Admitted Facts2, banker’s
I affirmations relating to MB, SCB, and HSBC,3 D’s movement record4, her I
post-recorded cautioned statement, and her cautioned video-recorded
J J
interview (“VRI”) and transcript5.
K K
3. There are seven Prosecution (P) witnesses:
L L
(a) Pw1 and Pw2, both victims of online shopping scams,
M M
6
did not testify but their witness statements were
N N
submitted under s65B of the Criminal Procedures
O
Ordinance. O
P P
(b) The witness statements of Pw3 to Pw5, all staff of the
Q above three banks, and Pw6, a money laundering expert, Q
were also submitted under s65B.7
R R
2
S P1. S
3
P4, 6, and 8.
4
P10.
T 5 T
P12, 12A, and 12B.
6
P2, 2A, 3, and 3A.
7
P5, 5A, 7, 7A, 9, 9A, 13.
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
(c) Pw7 and Pw8, arresting officer and officer-in-charge of
C C
the case, respectively, were tendered for cross-
D examination. D
E E
4. Defence submitted exhibits relating to the account opening
F procedures of MB and SCB, the account opening information of a person F
named HONNAG Jenelyn Genna (“Genna”), and a photo of a shirt seized
G G
8
from D.
H H
5. D did not testify. This is her right and no adverse inference
I I
was drawn against her. She called her ex-employer as witness.
J J
6. D has a clear record, and more favourable inferences in
K K
respect of her propensity and credibility were drawn.
L L
7. P has to prove all charges beyond reasonable doubt, D does
M M
not have to prove anything.
N N
O
8. I have considered all the evidence and submission in reaching O
the verdict.
P P
Q B. Admitted Facts Q
B.1. Online shopping scams
R R
S 9. D admitted the following facts. At around 8 pm on 3 April S
2023, Pw1 saw an online post placed by an unknown scammer posing as a
T T
8
D1-4.
U U
V V
-5-
A A
B B
genuine seller, stating that a PlayStation 5 games console, two controllers,
C and two games were for sale for $2,800. Pw1, acting on the scammer’s C
instructions, transferred a total of $2,800 into two personal accounts, of
D D
which $2,000 into Charge 1 Account on 4 April 2023. Pw1 never received
E the goods and, upon realising she had been deceived, reported the case. E
F F
10. At around 11 pm on 6 May 2023, Pw2 saw an online post
G placed by an unknown scammer posing as a genuine seller, stating that G
tickets for a concert were for sale. Pw2, acting on the scammer’s
H H
instructions, transferred a total of $24,645.10 into various personal
I accounts, of which $3,960.46 into Charge 1 Account. Pw2 never received I
the tickets and, upon realising that she had been deceived, reported the case.
J J
K B.2. Charge 1 Account K
L L
11. Charge 1 Account, held in D’s name, was opened on 26 March
M 2023. The following information was provided upon account opening: M
N N
Account Purpose: Savings
O Residential Address: Floor 5, No. 115 Kweilin Street, O
Sham Shui Po, HK
P P
Telephone number: 6752 8647
Q Q
Email:
[email protected]
R
Occupation Sector: Retail and Wholesale, R
Administrative, Agencies and
S S
Support Service Activities
T Average Monthly $15,000 T
Income:
U U
V V
-6-
A A
B B
Preferred language: Zh-Hant
C C
12. In setting up this account, D’s identity card (no. WX
D D
410941(2)), and her face were scanned as identity proof.
E E
13. Between 28 March and 9 May 2023, $8,597,833.36 was
F F
credited to that account through 4,787 deposits, and $8,565,738.10 was
G debited from it through 1,407 withdrawals. G
H H
14. The deposits were made by 2,312 individuals, of these, 313
I made deposits into that account more than three times during the period. I
There were 958 deposits between $2,000 and $50,001.58, including those
J J
made by Pw1 and Pw2. Money credited into that account was commingled
K and disposed of through outward transfers on a daily basis. 959 individuals K
received money from that account.
L L
M 15. On 9 May 2023, that account had a closing balance of M
$32,095.26, which was entirely withdrawn on 9 August 2023.
N N
O B.3. Charge 2 Account O
P P
16. Charge 2 Account, held in D’s name, was opened on 26 March
Q 2023. The following information was provided upon account opening: Q
R R
Account Purpose: Savings
S S
Residential Address: 5 Floor, 115 Kweilin Street, Sham
T
Shui Po T
Telephone number: 6771 2542
U U
V V
-7-
A A
B B
Email:
[email protected]
C Occupation Sector: Catering, restaurant & C
catering/waiter/manager/bartender
D D
Gross Annual Income: $70,000
E Language to be Chinese E
displayed on ATM
F F
screen:
G G
17. In setting up that account, D’s identity card and her face were
H H
scanned as identity proof.
I I
18. On 31 March 2023, $92,940.08 was credited into that account
J J
through 70 deposits, and $92,800 was debited from it through 10
K withdrawals. The deposits, made by 64 individuals, were between $100 K
and $10,000.87. Money credited into Charge 2 Account was commingled
L L
and transferred to nine other accounts on the same day.
M M
B.4. Charge 3 Account
N N
O 19. Charge 3 Account, held in D’s name, was opened on 26 March O
P
2023. The following information was provided upon account opening: P
Q Q
Account Purpose: Savings/Fixed deposit
R Residential Address: 5F, No. 115 Kweilin Street, Sham R
Shui Po
S S
Telephone number: 6771 2542
T Email:
[email protected] T
U U
V V
-8-
A A
B B
Occupation: McDonalds
C Gross Annual Income: $180,000 C
D D
20. In setting up that account, D’s identity card and her face were
E scanned as identity proof. E
F F
21. On 31 March 2023, $45,100.78 was deposited into that
G account by three individuals, of which $10,000 was transferred to another G
individual.
H H
I B.5. D I
J J
22. D had been employed to work in Hong Kong as a foreign
K domestic helper since 14 July 2017. Her monthly salary was $4,630 K
between 14 July 2021 and 13 July 2023, and $4,730 between 14 July 2023
L L
and her arrest on 27 November 2023.
M M
23. For the years of assessment 2020/21 to 2022/23, no tax return
N N
or Employer’s Return of Remuneration and Pensions in respect of D was
O filed. O
P P
24. On 11 June 2020, D opened an account with AliPayHK,
Q registering with the phone number 5644 7664. Q
R R
25. She has a clear criminal record in Hong Kong.
S S
T
C. Pws T
C.1. Pw1 and Pw2
U U
V V
-9-
A A
B B
C 26. The material parts of the witness statements of Pw1 and Pw2 C
are stated in the Admitted Facts.
D D
E C.2. Pw3 E
F F
27. According to Pw3’s witness statement 9 and oral testimony,
G she joined MB in January 2023 and is now the Assistant Manager of G
Customer Due Diligence and Account Investigation, mainly responsible
H H
for conducting background checks on customers, anti-money laundering
I and anti-deception investigations, etc. I
J J
28. MB is a virtual bank, offering personal customers general
K banking services, including but not limited to savings account. Since MB K
does not run physical branches, customers have to download its app on
L L
their mobile devices before they can use MB’s services.
M M
29. People aged 18 or above and holding a valid Hong Kong
N N
identity (“HKID”) card are eligible to apply for a MB account, and they
O can submit an application by entering their personal particulars. The O
procedures for opening a MB account are as follows:
P P
Q (a) The applicant must download the MB app with a Q
mobile device, and then enter his/her personal
R R
particulars, including Chinese and English names, date
S S
T T
9
P5, 5A.
U U
V V
- 10 -
A A
B B
of birth, identification document number, email address,
C and registered phone number, into the app. C
D D
(b) On receiving a text message containing a numerical
E verification code from MB through the mobile phone E
number entered, the applicant shall enter the code into
F F
the app for verification.
G G
(c) The applicant shall follow the app’s instructions to set
H H
up a personal identification number (PIN) for the
I account and scan the front and back of his/her I
identification document with the app. The applicant has
J J
to scan his/her identification document from different
K angles to show that it is the original copy instead of a K
photo or an image. Uploading a photo or an image of
L L
the identification document is inapplicable. At this
M stage, the bank accepts account opening application M
from HKID card holders only.
N N
O (d) On completion of the scanning, the applicant shall let O
the app capture his/her face by exposing the different
P P
sides of the face to the phone camera. The app will
Q automatically scan and take photos of the applicant’s Q
facial features for record purposes. The app does not
R R
accept uploaded photos.
S S
(e) The applicant has to enter the remaining personal
T T
particulars required, such as place of birth, nationality,
U U
V V
- 11 -
A A
B B
tax position, and registered address, into the app. The
C applicant does not need to provide supporting C
documents, unless required by the bank.
D D
E 30. After the applicant has completed the above procedures, MB’s E
computer system will automatically compare the applicant’s facial features
F F
captured in real time with those in the holder’s photo on the identity card
G to see if they match, and verify whether that card is genuine. G
H H
31. On completion of the verification, the application is
I completed. Successful applicants will immediately receive an account I
number and a MasterCard number through the app and will be able to use
J J
the account and credit card services with the app.
K K
32. Applicants who have successfully opened accounts can log on
L L
to them with the app through the facial recognition system, through the
M fingerprint verification system on the phone, or by entering the PIN. M
N N
33. Regarding the application for Charge 1 Account:10
O O
(a) Pw3 knows that the prefix ‘WX’ of D’s HKID no.
P P
means foreign domestic helper.
Q Q
(b) ‘Floor 5, No. 115 Kweilin street, SHAM SHUI PO,
R R
SHAM SHUI PO, HK’ was the address registered upon
S account opening in March 2023.11 S
T T
10
P4(43-44).
11
P4(45).
U U
V V
- 12 -
A A
B B
C (c) By July 2023, the last registered address was changed C
to ‘Flat Room c Floor 3, Wing wah building, 14-24 sai
D D
yeung choi street, MONG KOK, YAU TSIM MONG,
E HK’.12 E
F F
34. Exhibit D1 is MB’s advertisement which states, inter alia, that
G for the application for a MB account, ‘all you need is one app’, ‘You don’t G
even need proof of address’, and ‘Just your ID’. 13
H H
I 35. Exhibit D2 is a set of MB account opening documents I
concerning Genna. The residential address is the same as that registered
J J
upon the opening of Charge 1 Account.14 The prefix of Genna’s HKID no.
K is also ‘WX’ and the preferred language is ‘zh-Hant’ as well. K
L L
C.3. Pw4
M M
36. According to Pw4’s witness statement15 and oral testimony,
N N
she joined SCB in 2023 and hold a position in the digital banking
O department, responsible for remote account opening and digital O
authentication.
P P
Q 37. For individual customers, the procedures for opening a SCB Q
account via the mobile app are as follows:
R R
S S
12
P4(314).
13
Page 3.
T 14
Namely “Floor 5, No. 115 Kweilin street, SHAM SHUI PO, SHAM SHUI PO, T
HK”.
15
P7, 7A.
U U
V V
- 13 -
A A
B B
C (a) Customers mainly apply for and operate their bank C
accounts via the app. To be eligible for account opening
D D
as a Hong Kong resident, applicants must be aged 18 or
E above, with a valid mobile number and an email E
address to receive SMS for identity verification, a valid
F F
Hong Kong or Mainland China residential address, and
G a valid adult HKID card. G
H H
(b) The applicant must download the SC Mobile Hong
I Kong App onto his smartphone, or download and I
install the installation file from SCB’s website.
J J
K (c) In the app, the applicant has to enter his/her mobile K
number to receive a SMS from SCB containing a one-
L L
time six digit verification code. The applicant can
M proceed with the account opening application once his M
number has been verified on entry of the code.
N N
O (d) The applicant is required to take a photo of the front O
and back of his/her identity card. He or she also has to
P P
take selfies to pass identity verification by facing the
Q smart device’s camera (with and without blinking) in a Q
horizontal position. The app automatically scans the
R R
applicant’s facial features and verifies the applicant’s
S identity. The app does not accept uploaded photos. S
T T
U U
V V
- 14 -
A A
B B
(e) The applicant shall fill in personal particulars such as
C name, date of birth, HKID card number, occupation, C
and residential address. He then clicks ‘agree and
D D
continue’ to indicate agreement to the relevant terms
E and sets a personal login passcode. E
F F
(f) After the applicant completes the entry, the bank’s
G computer system will automatically review all the G
information submitted by the applicant, including
H H
checking whether the applicant’s selfie matches his/her
I identity card, and verifying the authenticity of that card. I
Once the review is completed and successfully passed,
J J
the application process is complete. SCB will notify the
K applicant by sending SMS and email to the registered K
phone number and email address.
L L
M (g) The operations team will conduct a manual review M
within the agreed timeframe. The financial crime
N N
department will follow up where any issue arises.
O O
38. Regarding Charge 2 Account:16
P P
Q (a) Pw4 does not know what the prefix ‘WX’ of HKID no. Q
means.17
R R
S S
T T
16
P6.
17
P6(408).
U U
V V
- 15 -
A A
B B
(b) A foreign domestic helper does not need to produce an
C employment contract to open a SCB account. C
D D
(c) There is Chinese in the information provided for
E Charge 2 Account. E
F F
(d) P6(416) is a photo taken to open Charge 2 Account.
G G
39. Exhibit D4 shows SCB’s website, which provides ‘Tips on
H H
account opening’ including taking the selfie photo in ‘a private space’ 18.
I Pw4 said that this is to make sure that there is only one person in the photo. I
J J
C.4. Pw5
K K
40. According to Pw5’s witness statement19 and oral testimony,
L L
she joined HSBC in 2018 and is the Personal Banking Manager responsible
M for the account opening process. M
N N
41. To open a personal online banking account at HSBC, new
O applicants must download the bank’s app on their mobile phones and fill O
in the account opening documents (including personal information, reason
P P
for opening the account, source of funds, etc.) through the app, and present
Q their HKID card. Q
R R
42. The process of opening a HSBC account via the app is as
S follows: S
T T
18
Page 2.
19
P9, 9A.
U U
V V
- 16 -
A A
B B
C (a) Applicants enter their email address and mobile phone C
number, and will receive a message from HSBC
D D
containing a verification code. They need to enter the
E code into the app for verification. E
F F
(b) They must upload their HKID cards and their selfies at
G various angles for verification, and also take a selfie G
video. Photographs of identity document and images of
H H
selfies cannot be uploaded.
I I
(c) Applicants need to enter their personal information in
J J
the app, such as place of birth, nationality, tax status,
K and residential address. Applicants do not need to K
provide proof unless required by the bank.
L L
M (d) The bank will conduct a credit and identity check on M
the applicants within three business days to verify that
N N
the account opening information, HKID card, and selfie
O are their own. O
P P
20
43. Regarding Charge 3 Account:
Q Q
(a) The personal information on the ‘HSBC Advance
R R
Account Opening Form’ 21
was provided through the
S HSBC app. S
T T
20
P8.
21
P8(441).
U U
V V
- 17 -
A A
B B
C (b) Pw5 does not know what the prefix ‘WX’ of HKID no. C
means.
D D
E (c) The photo on P8(456) was taken during the account E
opening process of Charge 3 Account.
F F
G (d) The application process needed three days to verify the G
applicant’s face and ID before the app could be fully
H H
utilized.
I I
(e) No human contact was involved in opening this account.
J J
K C.5. Pw6 K
L L
44. Pw6 stated in his witness statement 22 , inter alia, the
M prevalence of the use of stooge for money laundering, the statistics on M
classified money laundering cases and stooges identified from such cases,
N N
and the modus operandi of and the harm caused by money laundering to
O the community. O
P P
C.6. Pw7 and Pw8
Q Q
45. Pw7 testified that he conducted VRI with D during which he
R R
showed her a shirt depicted in exhibit D3 and seized from D’s workplace
S where she lived. S
T T
22
P13.
U U
V V
- 18 -
A A
B B
C 46. Pw8, officer-in-charge of this case at the time of the VRI, C
testified that she was then investigating at least three Chinese individuals
D D
of a syndicate relating to the present case, namely SIU Justin Seco, PUT
E Ho-ki, and SHUM Hung-chun, the latter two of whom were arrested. E
Genna was also a subject of investigation. 23
F F
G C.7. D G
H H
47. Under arrest and caution, D stated, ‘In March 2023, a Filipino
I friend approached me in Tseung Kwan O and asked me to do some facial I
recognition process on her phone. She also took photos of my Hong Kong
J J
ID card. She claimed it was for a game. As a return, she paid me 400 dollars
K in cash.’24 K
L L
48. In VRI, D stated the followings:25
M M
(a) She was born in the Philippines, 38 years old, and a
N N
widow. She had tertiary education and spoke Tagalog
O and English.26 She had a child aged 14 who lived with O
her mother-in-law.27
P P
Q (b) D came to Hong Kong in 2017 to work as a domestic Q
helper, earning a salary of $6,000 payable by cash, with
R R
S S
23
MFI-1.
24
P11.
T 25 T
P12B.
26
Counter 97-121.
27
Counter 160-180.
U U
V V
- 19 -
A A
B B
no other income source.28 She had no assets, company,
C or bank account in Hong Kong. She was not a director C
or shareholder of a company. She did not file any tax
D D
return in Hong Kong. She had a bank account in the
E Philippines with $4,000 therein which she received E
upon her husband’s death, and she had no investment.29
F F
G (c) During D’s holiday on a Sunday in March 2023 in G
Popcorn Mall, Tseung Kwan O (“TKO”), her sister
H H
introduced her friend, a Filipino woman called Jane
I Corpuz, to D. Jane asked if D would like to earn ‘instant I
cash’ for which D only had to register her HKID card
J J
and scan her face. Jane said it was ‘only for the game’.
K Therefore, D agreed to register a game account by K
having her facial recognition taken and her HKID card
L L
photographed. This was the only time D saw Jane
M whom D could contact only on Facebook.30 M
N N
(d) The facial recognition and photo-taking, lasted about
O 30 to 45 minutes, were done by one of two Chinese men O
who were present.31 D did not know their names, did
P P
32
not see them again, and had no means to contact them.
Q Q
R R
S S
28
Counter 122-158.
29
Counter 182-238.
T 30 T
Counter 243-348.
31
Counter 349-392.
32
Counter 446-452.
U U
V V
- 20 -
A A
B B
(e) D was paid $400 the next day through her Alipay
C account which she registered with her mobile phone C
33
number, name, and HKID number. She had no other
D D
‘stored value facilities’. 34
E E
(f) D said she did not open any of the accounts in the three
F F
charges and did not know who did. She did not receive
G the bank card or password for any of these accounts.35 G
H H
(g) D did not control Charge 2 Account, or have any
I knowledge about or explanation for the deposits of I
$92,589.18 into and withdrawals of $93,150.9 from it
J J
on 31 March 2023.36
K K
(h) D did not receive Charge 3 Account’s bank card or
L L
password, or have any knowledge about the deposits of
M $45,100.78 into and withdrawals of $55,100.78 from it M
on 31 March 2023.37
N N
O (i) P4(43) (relating to the opening of Charge 1 Account) O
has a photo of D’s HKID card; the clothing in a facial
P P
recognition photo thereon was worn by her when the
Q Chinese man scanned her face.38 Q
R R
33
S Counter 394-440. S
34
Counter 886-888.
35
Counter 458-486.
T 36 T
Counter 487-512.
37
Counter 515-540.
38
Counter 544-589.
U U
V V
- 21 -
A A
B B
(j) P4(44) (relating to the opening of Charge 1 Account)
C has D’s photo, name, date of birth, and HKID number. C
But she did not recognize the phone number, email
D D
address, or the residential address thereon. She never
E resided in that address and had no knowledge about it. E
She did not know who input the incorrect information
F F
that her occupation sector was retail and wholesale,
G administrative agencies and support service activities, G
and that her average monthly salary was $15,000.39
H H
I (k) She did not receive Charge 1 Account’s bank card or I
password. She did not know who made, and had no
J J
explanation for, the deposits of $8,595,774.89 into and
K withdrawals of $8,565,738.1 from it between 28 March K
and 9 May 2023. She did not know about the remittance
L L
of $2,000 by CHEUNG Lok-yee on 4 April 2023 or that
M of $3,960.46 by LUI Man-chun on 9 May 2023 to that M
account. She did not know anything about the
N N
transactions in that account.40
O O
(l) She did not know about the IP address 59.149.92.6. or
P P
its registered owner, or the address at Flat H, 30/F,
Q Block 13, Central Heights, Park Central, TKO. She did Q
not connect Charge 1 Account to the internet via this IP
R R
S S
T T
39
Counter 591-652.
40
Counter 654-702.
U U
V V
- 22 -
A A
B B
address, log in to this account, change personal
C information in it, or make transactions with it.41 C
D D
(m) She did not know Siu Justin Seko, Poon Ho Kei, Shum
E Hung Chun, Sebastian Maribeth Lopez, Remetha E
Monique, Didiaos Eva Guanes, Bahiawa Lalipas
F F
Guime, Monila Jesusa Mora, Policarpio Venus Rubang,
G Bayawa Marjorie Damas, Bandilla Natividad Anire, G
Gabayan Christie Batoon, Kadak Yastriny, Venili
H H
Asteria Mundok, Hornak Geneline Gina, Aquino Karen
I Macarella, Amante Generosa Bongo, or Bautista I
Antonina Palazzo.42
J J
K C.8. Dw K
L L
49. Dw was a dental nurse and is now a housewife with a 11 year
M old child. M
N N
50. She employed D as a domestic helper since 2017 until 2024.
O D did not have an online or other bank account in Hong Kong. D was her O
family’s breadwinner; her salary, paid by cash, was sent to the Philippines
P P
for the expenses of her husband and son.
Q Q
51. D borrowed from Dw three times for a total sum of $60,000
R R
to $70,000 which was repaid entirely. The first and second times were
S when D’s father and mother passed away, respectively. The third time was S
T T
41
Counter 704-732.
42
Counter 734-808.
U U
V V
- 23 -
A A
B B
in April or May 2023 when D was short of money because her husband
C had cancer and she had to return to the Philippines. C
D D
52. The maintenance of D’s son was financially assisted by Dw
E in the sum of $1,200 to $1,500 per month because D helped Dw a lot for E
over seven years and D’s husband had passed away.
F F
G 53. D is honest, responsible, and not greedy. She trusted people G
very easily.
H H
I 54. On Sundays, D either went to church or strolled in the malls I
near Dw’s home.
J J
K 55. With faith in D, Dw continued to employ her after her arrest K
for money laundering, paid for D’s police bail, and supported D in court.
L L
Dw does not believe that D committed the offences in this case. Dw
M terminated D’s employment eventually because she needed a helper but D M
was then remanded by the court; had D been on bail, Dw would still have
N N
employed her.
O O
D. Evidence analysis
P P
D.1. Pws and Dw
Q Q
56. Having meticulously considered all Pws’ evidence, I find that
R R
they testified directly and sincerely, their testimonies are reasonable,
S consistent, and supported by agreed documentary exhibits. I find them S
honest and reliable and accept their evidence. I also accept Dw’s evidence.
T T
U U
V V
- 24 -
A A
B B
D.2. D
C C
57. Defence submitted that D merely took part in what she
D D
believed to be a registration process for an online game, and had no
E knowledge of opening any bank account. Defence also relied on Dw’s E
evidence about D’s character.43
F F
G 58. Having carefully considered D’s version and Dw’s testimony G
and observed D’s demeanour in the VRI, I agree with P44 and accept D’s
H H
oral and post-recorded cautioned statements, except for the assertion that
I Jane said the facial recognition of D and the photo-taking of D’s HKID I
card were for a game.
J J
59. I also accept the parts of D’s VRI stated in para. 48(a) to (e)
K K
above, except for the assertions that (a) Jane said the registration of D’s
L HKID card and the scanning of D’s face were ‘only for the game’, and (b) L
D agreed with Jane to register a game account.
M M
N 60. I do not accept the rest of D’s evidence. N
O O
61. I reject the said parts of D’s version because it is unreasonable
P and inherently improbable that Jane said the photo-taking and face P
scanning were only for a game, and that D agreed with the same, for the
Q Q
following reasons:
R R
(a) Although D was a foreign domestic helper, she was 38
S S
years old with tertiary education.
T T
43
Defence Closing Submissions, para. 1-4, 8, 10-15, 21-23, 26, 30, 33, 35, 39-47.
44
Prosecution Closing Submissions, para. 15.
U U
V V
- 25 -
A A
B B
C (b) D had an AlipayHK account which she registered with C
her HKID card number.
D D
E (c) Although Jane, a Filipino, was introduced to D as a E
friend by D’s sister, D had not seen Jane or the two
F F
Chinese men before.
G G
(d) D could contact Jane only on Facebook.
H H
I (e) The face scanning and photo-taking were done by one I
of the two Chinese men. D did not know their names,
J J
did not see them again, and had no means to contact
K them. K
L L
(f) D was paid $400 for those actions.
M M
(g) There is no evidence that any game account was opened
N N
with D’s personal information; conversely, the
O accounts in the three charges were all opened in D’s O
name with her photo and particulars on the same day
P P
when the face scanning and photo-taking were done.
Q Q
Thus, I am sure that (a) Jane did not say that those actions were taken for
R R
game, and (b) D did not agree to register a game account.
S S
T T
U U
V V
- 26 -
A A
B B
62. On the contrary, for the same reasons stated in the preceding
C paragraph, I agree with P45 that D must have known that the face scanning C
and photo-taking were done for opening the accounts in the three charges.
D D
E 63. Although I do not accept parts of D’s evidence, this does not E
mean that she is guilty of any charge because the burden is on P.
F F
G E. Charges G
E.1. Charge 1
H H
E.1.1. Dealing with property
I I
64. Defence submitted that D could not have set up the three
J J
subject accounts by herself for reasons including that (a) she had no bank
K account in Hong Kong; and (b) the preferred language for the application K
for Charge 2 Account46 was changed to Chinese which D, being a Filipino,
L L
did not know.47
M M
65. Nonetheless, I find that D could still have dealt with the
N N
property in the three subject accounts under the principle of joint enterprise.
O According to HKSAR v Chan Kam Shing (2016) 19 HKCFAR 640, para. O
40:
P P
Q ‘The essence of the joint criminal enterprise principle Q
involves the accomplice’s culpability for the
R R
criminal act of another person, of a co-adventurer –
not his own act – falling within the agreed scope of
S S
T 45 T
Prosecution Closing Submissions, para. 16.
46
P6, p. 408.
47
Defence Closing Submissions, para. 28, 35-37.
U U
V V
- 27 -
A A
B the joint enterprise or foreseen as a possible incident B
thereof.’
C C
D 66. The particulars of all charges are that D dealt with the relevant D
property ‘together with Jane Corpuz and other persons unknown’. D
E E
provided her HKID card to them and let them scan her face, knowing that
F they were using such information to open the three accounts. Thus, their F
setting up the accounts were ‘falling within the agreed scope of the joint
G G
enterprise or foreseen as a possible incident thereof.’
H H
67. Since D had an AlipayHK account and a bank account in the
I I
Philippines, she must also have known that the three subject accounts were
J opened for deposits and withdrawals of funds. J
K K
68. Therefore, based on the evidence accepted by the court,
L L
during the period of Charge 1 in Hong Kong, D together with Jane and
M
other persons unknown must have dealt with the property in that charge. M
N N
E.1.2. Knowledge or belief
O O
69. I have considered the case authorities cited by P and Defence:
P P
Seng Yuet Fong v. HKSAR [1992] 2 HKC 833, HKSAR v Pang Hung Fai
Q (2014) 17 HKCFAR 778, HKSAR v Yeung Ka Sing Carson (2016) 19 Q
HKCFAR 279, and HKSAR v Harjani Haresh Murlidhar (2019) 22
R R
HKCFAR 446.
S S
70. Defence specifically referred to Pang Hung Fai in which the
T T
CFA held that even though the appellant was offered no explanation and
U U
V V
- 28 -
A A
B B
he made no enquiry as to why his account was used, it was not apparent
C that what was untoward involved proceeds of an indictable offence.48 C
D D
71. I do not agree that Pang Hung Fai is comparable to the present
E case. In that case, the appellant and the person using his account, Kwok, E
had been close friends for over 30 years. The appellant had successful
F F
businesses, owned two premises of over 10,000 sq ft in Hong Kong and
G two factories in China, and employed thousands of workers in both China G
and Bangladesh. Kwok, the chairman and a major shareholder in a Hong
H H
Kong listed company, operated a business of a very large scale in various
I countries, employed tens of thousands of workers, and leased factories of I
100,000 sq ft from the Appellant. They had also lent each other millions of
J J
dollars which were repaid. The CFA held that the trial judge failed to refer
K to the trust existed between the appellant and Kwok, and to properly take K
into account the close and lengthy personal and business relationship
L L
between them.49 Nevertheless, in the instant case, D was a foreign domestic
M helper who had not even seen Jane or the two Chinese men before. M
N N
72. In Harjani Haresh Murlidhar, the CFA held:
O O
‘26. In Carson Yeung 50 , this Court endorsed that
P P
proposition. We remain of the view that the Seng
Q
Yuet Fong test correctly represents the law. In the Q
interests of clarity, however, we would reformulate
R the test as follows: R
S S
T 48 T
Defence Closing Submissions, para. 18-19.
49
Para. 10-12, 103-107.
50
(2016) 19 HKCFAR 279, para 103.
U U
V V
- 29 -
A A
B (i) What facts or circumstances, B
including those personal to
C C
the defendant, were known to
D the defendant that may have D
affected his belief as to
E whether the property was the E
proceeds of crime (“tainted”)?
F F
(ii) Would any reasonable person
G G
who shared the defendant’s
H knowledge be bound to H
believe that the property was
I tainted? I
J J
(iii) If the answer to question (ii) is
K
“yes” the defendant is guilty. K
If it is “no” the defendant is
L not guilty. L
M M
27. Thus the first issue that the judge or jury (“the
court”) must address is what matters the defendant
N N
knew of that might have affected his belief as to
O whether the property was clean or tainted. This O
question is subjective only in as much as it requires
P the tribunal to make findings as to the knowledge of P
the defendant at the time of the relevant transaction.
Q Q
Where the defendant gives evidence of facts and
matters that affected his belief about the nature of the
R R
property, the court has to decide whether he is, or may
S be, telling the truth about the existence of these facts S
and matters.
T T
U U
V V
- 30 -
A A
B 28. The second issue is whether any reasonable B
person who shared the defendant’s knowledge would
C C
have been bound to believe that the property was
D tainted. This question is objective. Where the court D
finds that the defendant was, or may have been,
E telling the truth about the existence of facts and E
matters that he claims affected his belief, the court
F F
must take those facts and matters into account when
answering the question, would any reasonable person
G G
with knowledge of those facts and matters have
H believed that the property was tainted? If the answer H
to the question is “yes” the defendant is guilty. If it is
I “no” the defendant is not guilty. I
J J
29. Applying these principles in practice will
K
normally be relatively straightforward where the K
defendant does not give or adduce evidence. The
L court has first to find what relevant facts or L
circumstances were known to the defendant and then
M M
decide whether those facts or circumstances would
have led any reasonable person to believe that the
N N
property in question was tainted. If the answer is “yes”
O the defendant will be convicted. When the judge O
comes to sentence he or she will be likely to do so on
P the basis that the defendant must also have believed P
that the property was the proceeds of crime.
Q Q
30. Difficulty can arise in practice where the
R R
defendant gives evidence that he did not believe that
S the property was tainted. Although the test in law is S
objective – “would any reasonable person believe the
T property was tainted?” – in applying that test the court T
must give due consideration to the evidence given by
U U
V V
- 31 -
A A
B the defendant as to what he believed and why. The B
court has to consider two interrelated questions: (i) is
C C
the defendant telling the truth when he says that he
D did not believe that the property was tainted and (ii) D
could a reasonable person in the position of the
E defendant have failed to believe that the property was E
tainted?
F F
31. Normally the court will give the same answer to
G G
each question. If the court concludes that no
H reasonable person in the position of the defendant H
could have failed to believe that the property was
I tainted the court is likely to reject the defendant’s I
assertion that he did not have this belief. Applying
J J
the statutory test the defendant will be convicted.
K K
32. Conversely, where the court accepts that the
L defendant did not believe that the property was L
tainted, this is likely to be in circumstances where the
M M
court has concluded that a reasonable person in the
position of the defendant would not necessarily have
N N
believed that the property was tainted. Applying the
O statutory test the defendant will be acquitted. O
P 33. A rare case may arise where the court concludes P
that any reasonable person in the position of the
Q Q
defendant would have believed that the property was
tainted but nonetheless accepts the evidence of the
R R
defendant when he says that he did not have this belief.
S This is only likely to arise in circumstances where it S
is apparent that the defendant lacks the reasoning
T abilities of the normal person. In such circumstances, T
applying the statutory test, the defendant should be
U U
V V
- 32 -
A A
B convicted but the fact that he did not himself believe B
that the property was tainted may well be a mitigating
C C
factor when he is sentenced.’
D D
73. I have also considered HKSAR v Wong Chor Wo CACC
E E
314/2006 in which the Court of Appeal held at para. 108:
F F
“In the normal course of events, if a man allows
G G
another person to use his bank accounts to deposit
and withdraw funds, in the absence of evidence to the
H H
contrary, the inevitable inference will arise that the
I holder of the bank account has reasonable grounds to I
believe that the funds passing through the account
J represent the proceeds of an indictable offence.” J
K K
74. Defence questioned the (lack of) security of the three banks’
L account opening processes.51 However, I agree with P52 that this does not L
assist the court in determining whether D knew or had reasonable grounds
M M
to believe that the subject property was tainted because she knew that the
N subject accounts would be opened with her information anyway. N
O O
75. Defence referred to exhibit D2, i.e. the account opening
P information of Genna, which contains the same address as that provided P
for Charge 1 Account.53 Nonetheless, there is no evidence as to whether D
Q Q
R 51
Defence Closing Submissions, para. 26-31. R
52
Prosecution Closing Submissions, para. 4.
S
53
In para. 27 of Defence Closing Submissions, it was suggested that Genna was ‘one S
of the victims of a scamming gang’; and since the same address was used for both
Genna’s account and Charge 1 Account, Defence argued that the principle of similar
T fact evidence applies. However, in court, Defence agreed that actually there is no T
evidence that Genna was such a victim. Accordingly, I do not agree that the principle
of similar fact evidence applies in this case.
U U
V V
- 33 -
A A
B B
knew about this or why that address was used for Genna’s account, and so
C exhibit D2 does not assist the court in determining D’s knowledge or belief C
either.
D D
E 76. Defence argued that D had no reasonable grounds to believe E
that her information would be used in connection with fraud or proceeds
F F
of an indictable offence for reasons including the followings:54
G G
(a) Dw’s evidence on D’s personality, routine, and social
H H
exposure.
I I
(b) The photo-taking and face scanning took place during
J J
the day in public outside a shopping mall where D often
K visited. K
L L
(c) Had she had the alleged grounds of belief, she (i), as
M her family’s breadwinner, would not have agreed to the M
photo-taking and face scanning in return for a $400
N N
reward, thereby risking the loss of her stable job with a
O good employer like Dw; and (ii) would not have O
returned to Hong Kong after going to the Philippines in
P P
September 2023.
Q Q
(d) Pw6 (money laundering expert) stated that repeated
R R
deposits of around $2,000 to $3,000 made to personal
S bank accounts on a monthly basis may be rewards for S
T T
54
Defence Closing Submissions, para. 5, 9, 14, 23-25, 41, 46-47, 50-52.
U U
V V
- 34 -
A A
B B
lending or selling the accounts.55 However, there is no
C such evidence in this case. C
D D
77. I disagree with Defence for these reasons:
E E
(a) Notwithstanding Dw’s evidence and where the photo-
F F
taking and face scanning were done, the fact remains
G that D had never seen Jane or the two Chinese men G
before. Given that D was aged 38 with tertiary
H H
education, there was no reason why she would trust that
I they were not or would not be involved in indictable I
offences.
J J
K (b) Whilst D had a stable job with Dw who was a good K
employer, D was short of money in April/May 2023
L L
and she needed to borrow from Dw. Meanwhile,
M although there is no evidence that D received recurring M
rewards for providing her personal information, she
N N
was indeed given $400, which according to Defence,
O ‘is not insignificant for a low-income earner like [D]’.56 O
P P
(c) The fact that D returned to Hong Kong from the
Q Philippines in September 2023 in itself does not mean Q
that she did not have the alleged grounds of belief
R R
because, as Defence noted, she, being her family’s
S breadwinner, had a stable job with a good employer in S
T T
55
P13, para. 28.
56
Defence Closing Submissions, para. 48.
U U
V V
- 35 -
A A
B B
Hong Kong; therefore she had a financial reason to
C return. C
D D
78. Meanwhile, D knew the following facts:
E E
(a) She was 38 years old with tertiary education.
F F
G (b) She had a bank account in the Philippines and an G
AlipayHK account.
H H
I (c) She agreed with Jane to provide her HKID card and to I
have her face scanned, both for a total of $400, by one
J J
of two Chinese men.
K K
(d) D had not seen any of these people before.
L L
M (e) She could contact Jane only on Facebook. M
N N
(f) D did not know the Chinese men’s names or have the
O means to contact them.57 O
P P
(g) The purpose of the provision of the HKID card and face
Q scanning was the opening of the three subject accounts. Q
R R
79. Any reasonable person who shared D’s knowledge would be
S bound to believe that, during the period of Charge 1, $8,597,833.36 as S
T T
57
Counter 446-452.
U U
V V
- 36 -
A A
B B
stated in that charge was tainted; thus, she must have known or had
C reasonable grounds to believe that this property in whole or in part directly C
or indirectly represented any person’s proceeds of an indictable offence.
D D
E 80. Hence, P has proved Charge 1. E
F F
E.2. Charge 2
G G
81. For the reasons stated in para. 66 and 67 and based on the
H H
evidence accepted by the court, during the period of Charge 2 in Hong
I Kong, D together with Jane and other persons unknown must have dealt I
with the property stated in that charge.
J J
K 82. Given her knowledge stated in para. 78, any reasonable person K
who shared it would be bound to believe that, during the period of Charge
L L
2, $92,940.08 stated in that charge was tainted; thus, she must have known
M or had reasonable grounds to believe that this property in whole or in part M
directly or indirectly represented any person’s proceeds of an indictable
N N
offence.
O O
83. Hence, P has proved Charge 2.
P P
Q E.3. Charge 3 Q
R R
84. For the reason stated in para. 66 and 67 and based on the
S evidence accepted by the court, during the period of Charge 3 in Hong S
Kong, D together with Jane and other persons unknown must have dealt
T T
with the property stated in that charge.
U U
V V
- 37 -
A A
B B
C 85. Given her knowledge stated in para. 78, any reasonable person C
who shared it would be bound to believe that, during the period of Charge
D D
3, $45,100.78 stated in that charge was tainted; thus, she must have known
E or had reasonable grounds to believe that this property in whole or in part E
directly or indirectly represented any person’s proceeds of an indictable
F F
offence.
G G
86. Hence, P has proved Charge 3.
H H
I 87. Accordingly, D is convicted of all charges. I
J J
K K
L L
M M
( Edward Wong )
N Deputy District Judge N
O O
P P
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V