COURT: The defendant has pleaded guilty to one count of theft in the Magistrate Court and is committed to this court for sentence.
Summary of Facts reveals the following:
The defendant was running a logistics/warehouse company back in 2014. In February 2014, one of the defendant’s customers stored some 245,634 pieces of display panels at the defendant’s warehouse.
In March 2014, when the staff of the customer went to retrieve the display panels, they discovered that the warehouse was locked down and that the defendant was out of reach. Through the defendant’s business partner, the customer managed to gain access to the warehouse where only 980 pieces of display panels were found to be in existence. A total of 244,654 pieces of display panels valued at US$3.746 million, ie approximately HK$29 million, had gone missing.
Between February and March 2014, the defendant arranged to sell the relevant display panels to one Ms Lui, the wife of his brother, who then sold the relevant display panels onwards to another buyer. The relevant display panels, that is 243,361 pieces, were transported out of the warehouse on 5 March 2014. Not long after that, the defendant departed Hong Kong for China on 10 March 2014. Ms Lui subsequently transferred a total of RMB2,679,000 to bank accounts in China as instructed by the defendant. After the discovery that the relevant display panels were in fact stolen items, Ms Lui compensated her client with her own money. The police also managed to recover the 243,361 pieces of display panels.
About four years and nine months later, in December 2018, the defendant requested the mainland security to send him back to Hong Kong to surrender himself to the Hong Kong Police.
The defendant is 38 and has a clear record before the commission of the present offence. It was submitted in mitigation that due to competition from China and the exorbitant amount of rent that he had to pay for the operation, the defendant, as a result, incurred a huge amount of debt by 2014. As a result, the company could not function properly anymore and that the defendant decided to commit the present offence. It was also submitted that since the bulk of the display panels had been recovered by the police, the defendant’s customer suffered little loss.
The maximum sentence for theft is one of 10 years’ imprisonment. In the present case, the amount of display panels stolen comes to about HK$29 million.
In my view, there is a breach-of-trust element in this case. The defendant was entrusted by his customer to look after the goods in question at the relevant time. In other words, he was only able to run this logistics/warehouse business because his customers trusted him in the sense that the goods would only be handled in strict instruction of them. The defendant, unfortunately, breached that trust. It is, however, worth noting that the period over which the theft was perpetrated was not lengthy, only within a month or so. The effect on his customer was minimized by the swift action, the swift discovery of the goods by the police. I bear all those in mind when assessing the sentence.
As pointed out, the amount of the stolen display panels was in excess of 29 million which was a very substantial sum of money. Fortunately, most of the display panels have been recovered by the police and that the ultimate loss was around RMB2.679 million, the equivalant of about HK$3 million. The loss was not suffered by the customer but by the defendant’s relative, Ms Lui in this case. In any event, a loss is a loss.
According to the authority of Cheung Mee Kiu, for theft committed in breach of trust for over HK$15 million, the sentence imposed will be one of 10-plus years’ imprisonment. 29 million is almost double the maximum of 15 million in that case. In this case, the defendant is only charged with one count of theft, so the maximum sentence the court can impose is one of 10 years. In view of the amount of money involved and bearing in mind the actual loss as a result, I am of the view that the starting point in this case should still be set at 10 years’ imprisonment.
Apart from his plea, the defendant also surrendered himself to the law enforcement agency in China. That shows his remorse. For that, a small discount will be given. Adopting 10 years as the starting point and after considering all the circumstances of this case, I am of the view that a 35 per cent discount should be given. As such, for the offence the defendant stands convicted, he is sentenced to 78 months’ imprisonment. That is 6 years and 6 months.