HKSAR v. TANG ZHIRONG

DCCC 204/2025

[2026] HKDC 267

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 204 OF 2025

------------------------------

------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

--------------------------------------------------

1.  The defendant is charged with 3 counts of Dealing with property known or believed to represent proceeds of an indictable offence[1]. He pleaded guilty to all 3 charges and admitted the summary of facts. As a result, the defendant was convicted accordingly.

Summary of Facts

2.  Between November and December 2023, 13 individuals fell prey to different kinds of investment, employment and loan fraud in which they were deceived into making deposits to various bank accounts.  Among those accounts, the following 3 were held by the defendant:

(a) Bank Account with Stardard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) Limited with account number 41386070131 (“the SCB Account”);

(b) Bank account with Hang Seng Bank Limited with account number 923146591888 (“the Hang Seng Account”); and

(c) Bank account with CMB Wing Lung Bank Limited with account number 02060151688487 (“the Wing Lung Account”).

3.  The SCB Account was opened by the defendant on 18 October 2023 and he was the sole signatory.  Bank document of the SCB Account showed that between 24 November and 15 December 2023, there were 158 deposits in the total sum of HK$1,622,617.65 and 219 withdrawals in the total sum of HK$1,622,586.63.  Amongst the deposits, 26 of them in the total sum of HK$677,657.59 were made by the abovementioned fraud victims.

4.  The Hang Seng Account was opened by the defendant on 17 October 2023 and he was the sole signatory.  Bank document of the Hang Seng Account showed that between 24 and 27 November 2023, there were 13 deposits in the total sum of HK$518,983 and 18 withdrawals in the total sum of HK$518,904.  Amongst the deposits, 3 of them in the total sum of HK$230,000 were made by the abovementioned fraud victims.

5.  The Wing Lung Account was opened by the defendant on 17 October 2023 and he was the sole signatory.  Bank document of the Wing Lung Account showed that between 24 November and 6 December 2023, there were 31 deposits in the total sum of HK$1,731,032 and USD$1,030.  Further, there were 61 withdrawals in the total sum of HK$1,738,717.01.  Amongst the deposits, 5 of them in the total sum of HK$405,580 were made by the abovementioned fraud victims.

6.  Money laundering hallmarks were observed in the transaction patterns in the abovementioned bank accounts.  Mirror pattern of deposits and withdrawals, and quick speed of fund dissipation were noted.

7.  On 21 July 2024, the defendant was arrested by the Police.  Under caution, the defendant said the followings:

(a) He was a resident of Guangdong, Mainland China. He worked as a truck driver earning RMB 4,000 per month. He did not have any investment or property in Hong Kong;

(b) ln 2023, he was asked by a friend to come to Hong Kong to open the 3 bank accounts in question. After opening the accounts, he passed the bankcards to his friend; and

(c) He had no knowledge about the transactions of the 3 accounts in question and he did not know those fraud victims who deposited money into his 3 bank accounts.

8.  The defendant now admits, at the material times in Hong Kong, together with other persons, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe that property, namely the abovementioned amounts in the 3 bank accounts in question, in whole or in part directly or indirectly represented any person’s proceeds of an indictable offence, dealt with the said property.

Mitigation

9.  The defendant is 33 years of age and single.  He lives in Shanwei Province, Guangdong and received education up to junior high school.  He worked as a truck driver in Mainland China and earned around RMB 4,000 per month.  The defendant lived with his mother.  He is a person of clear record.

10.  Defence submitted that the defendant is genuinely remorseful. He is a first offender. Concerning the offence, it was submitted that the defendant did not know about the fraud in question and his involvement is only limited to lending out his bank accounts.  All in all, Defence urged the court to consider all the circumstances and impose a lenient sentence.

11.  As to the Prosecution’s application for enhancement of sentence, Defence does not object but urges the court to adopt a lower percentage of enhancement.

Sentencing Consideration

12.  There is no doubt that money laundering is a very serious offence. Not only does it encourage criminal activities, it also helps criminals to legitimize the proceeds of crime.  The Court of Appeal in cases like HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi[2], Secretary for Justice v Wan Kwok Keung^[3]and HKSAR v Boma^[4]has already set out the sentencing principles for this offence.  The factors to be considered are:

(a) the amount of money involved;

(b) the level of participation of the defendant;

(c) the nature of the predicate offence;

(d) the defendant’s knowledge of the nature of the predicate offence;

(e) whether there is any international element;

(f) the sophistication of the offence; and

(g) duration of the offence.

13.  The Court of Appeal repeatedly said there is no guideline for this offence.  However, it was suggested in Wan Kwok Keung that if the “black money” involved is between HK$1 million and HK$2 million, the sentence could be 3 years, if between HK$3 million and HK$6 million, the sentence could be about 4 years^[5]

14.  Based on the facts admitted by the defendant, the court is prepared to accept that he did not have any knowledge of the fraud in question and his level of participation is at the lower end.  The amount of money involved in the 3 charges are about HK$1.6 million, HK$0.51 million and HK$1.7 million respectively.  They are certainly not small amounts but are not particularly large in this type of cases.

15.  The court also considered the personal background of the defendant.  He is a first offender and showed his remorse by pleading guilty to all the charges.

16.  Considered all circumstances, I adopt 3 years’ imprisonment, i.e. 36 months as the starting point for Charges 1 and 3, and 18 months for Charge 2.  The defendant pleaded guilty at the earliest stage and is entitled to one third discount. As a result, the sentence for Charges 1 and 3 is 24 months’ imprisonment each and 12 months for Charge 2.

17.  Prosecution has furnished with the court a witness statement dated 6 January 2026 of Chief Inspector LI Yiu-nam of the Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Risk Assessment of the Financial Intelligence and Investigation Bureau, Hong Kong Police Force.  The information provided by Chief Inspector LI shows the prevalence the use of stooge for money laundering in Hong Kong.  The statistics showed that the number of cases rises from 16,643 in 2020 to 43,564 as of November 2025.  There is no doubt that this type of offence is very prevalent in Hong Kong and a deterrent sentence is called for to protect the community.

18.  Considered all the information I am satisfied that enhancement of sentence is appropriate in this case.  Having regard to the circumstances of the case, I am of the view that 25% enhancement is appropriate.

19.  Therefore, after the enhancement, the defendant is sentenced to 30 months’ imprisonment for Charges 1 and 3, and 15 months for Charge 2.

20.  Lastly, the court will deal with the totality of sentence. Considered all the circumstances, I order 3 months' imprisonment of Charges 2 and 3 each to be served consecutively to the sentence of Charge 1.  As a result, the total sentence is 36 months’ imprisonment.

[1] Contrary to section 25(1) and (3) of the Organised and Serious Crimes Ordinance, Cap. 455, Laws of Hong Kong

[2] [2010] 5 HKLRD 536

[3] [2012] 1 HKLRD 201

[4] [2012] 2 HKLRD 33

[5] See paragraph 15