HKSAR v. CHAN YAT HANG AND OTHERS

HCCC 411/2023

[2025] HKCFI 5291

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 411 OF 2023

________________________

________________________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

Introduction

1.  A total of 6 defendants were arrested and charged in this case, four of them pleading guilty, and two not guilty, to their respective charges.  On 4 December 2023, the 1^st, 2^nd, 3^rd and 4^th defendants pleaded guilty in the magistracy to most of the charges that they faced and they admitted a Summary of Facts dated 13 September 2023 in respect of those charges.  They were committed to the Court of First Instance for sentencing on those charges in HCCC 411/2023.  The two defendants who pleaded not guilty (“the other two defendants”)  were committed to the Court of First Instance for trial in another High Court criminal case.

2.  On 22 October 2025, before this Court, the 1^st, 2^nd, 3^rd and 4^th defendants confirmed their guilty pleas to their respective charges and their admission of the Summary of Facts.  As there were the other two defendants whose trial in the other High Court criminal case was to commence also on 22 October 2025, the sentencing of the 1^st, 2^nd, 3^rd and 4^th defendants was adjourned to the end of that trial.  The 3^rd defendant was expected to be called as a prosecution witness to testify against the other two defendants in their trial.

3.  For reasons which do not need to be set out here, the trial in the other High Court criminal case did not proceed as scheduled and had to be adjourned to a date to be fixed. 

4.  Today, counsel for the 1^st and 2^nd defendants, Mr. Job Mak and Mr. Adonis Cheung respectively, invited this Court to sentence them early and not to adjourn the sentencing any further.  In particular, the 1^st defendant has been remanded in custody pending sentence for almost 5 years; whereas the 2^nd defendant had been remanded for some 3 years and 9 months when he successfully obtained bail from the Court of First Instance on 19 August 2024 pending sentence.[1]  The matter has been hanging over their heads for almost 5 years despite their intention to plead guilty.

5.  On the other hand, the 3^rd defendant is still expected to testify in the trial against the other two defendants which has been postponed.  The Court has been informed that the 3^rd defendant is content to have his sentencing to take place at the end of the adjourned trial in case that further discount may be given to him on account of his testimony. 

6.  The 4^th defendant faces two counts of conspiracy to deal with proceeds of an indictable offence which are distinct from the main charges faced by the other defendants.  She also played no actual role in the incidents of robbery or attempted robbery, blackmail or criminal intimidation that the other defendants were involved in.  In all the circumstances, her counsel, Ms Vivien Chan, also invited the Court not to delay her sentencing any further.[2]

7.  Whilst it is clearly desirable to have all the defendants involved in the same case or cases sentenced at the same time, given the long lapse of time since the arrest and/or detention of the 1^st, 2^nd and 4^th defendants, I agree with their counsel that this Court should not wait any further in sentencing. 

8.  I shall therefore proceed to sentence the 1^st, 2^nd and 4^th defendants today.  At the invitation of his counsel, the sentencing of the 3^rd defendant is ordered to be adjourned to the end of the trial of the other two defendants.  If practicable, that trial should be fixed early and be presided by this Court so that at the end of that trial, I can also deal with the sentencing of the 3^rd defendant and that of the other two defendants, if they are to be convicted.  

Facts Admitted

9.  The 1^st defendant faces a total of 12 charges in respect of five incidents.  The 2^nd defendant faces a total of 4 charges as a co-defendant with the 1^st defendant in the 5^th incident.  The 4^th defendant faces two charges involving proceeds of crime from the 2^nd and 5^th incidents.  The facts of those five incidents as set out in the Summary of Facts and admitted by the 1^st, 2^nd and 4^th defendants can be summarized as follows. 

Incident 1

10.  On 6 November 2020, at about 10 pm, a male victim was lured by a female to get into a taxi to go to a rural area with her in Yuen Long.  Upon arrival, the victim was suddenly confronted by four males (including the 1^st defendant).  One male assaulted him with a spanner and the others punched and kicked him for around a minute.  One of them claimed to be a triad member.  They robbed him of his wallet, his HKID card, a bank ATM card (which was later used to withdraw $3,000)  and an iPhone (valued at $10,000): the 1^st charge of robbery against the 1^st defendant.

11.  They also accused the victim falsely of having taken $50,000 from one of them.  They demanded the victim to pay them money and to contact his friends to obtain funds.  At one stage, the male holding the spanner demanded the victim to undress and photographs were taken of him naked. 

12.  Later, in the presence of the 1^st defendant, a male demanded the victim to pay $15,000 into a bank account number to be provided to him, otherwise his naked photographs would be sent to his family members: the 2^nd charge of blackmail against the 1^st defendant.  The males (including the 1^st defendant)  then left the victim.

13.  The victim left the scene and made a report to the Police.  Many of his relatives (including his mother)  received his naked photographs taken in the incident.

14.  As a result of the incident, the victim sustained bruises over his periorbital region, left forehead, face and right thigh.

Incident 2

15.  On 20 November 2020, at around 9:30 p.m., another male victim was lured by a female to get into a taxi and go to an empty space with her in Yuen Long.  Upon arrival, just like what happened to the victim in the 1^st incident, this victim was assaulted by four males.  They punched and kicked him for around 5 minutes and falsely claimed that the victim owed one of them money.  The victim was then demanded to undress himself and photographs were taken of him naked.  Such photographs were later sent to his aunt.  The victim was robbed of his wallet, a bank card and his two iPhones (valued at $6,000 and $13,000).

16.  The victim was also demanded to obtain funds from his relatives or friends to repay his purported debt.  He called his aunt who transferred two sums of $50,000 and $20,000 respectively to his bank account(s).

17.  The males took his HSBC ATM card and they withdrew or transferred a total sum of $60,000 from his HSBC bank account: including two sums totalling $20,000 which were transferred to a HSBC bank account (numbered 166-719773-833)  held by the 4^th defendant.  Another sum of $10,000 was transferred from the victim’s Bank of China bank account to the same HSBC bank account of the 4^th defendant: the 14^th charge of conspiracy to deal with proceeds of an indictable offence against the 4^th defendant.  Out of those proceeds, a sum of $9,000 was transferred to the 4^th defendant’s HSB account (numbered 777443763668)  by ATM on 21 November 2020 which was then drawn by ATM in cash on the same day: the 13^th charge of conspiracy to deal with proceeds of an indictable offence against the 4^th defendant. 

18.  Out of the above stolen funds, a sum of $11,000 was transferred from the 4^th defendant’s HSBC account (numbered 166-719773-833)  to a HSBC bank account (numbered 805747755833)  held by the 1^st defendant.[3]  The transferred sum of $11,000 was withdrawn in cash from the 1^st defendant’s HSBC bank account at an ATM on the same date: the 3^rd charge of dealing with proceeds of an indictable offence against the 1^st defendant.

Incidents 3 and 4

19.  On 21 November 2020 at around mid-night, X (a female victim)  was lured by an acquaintance to get into a taxi with a female to go to a rural area.  Upon arrival, a total of five males (including the 1^st defendant)  confronted her.  One of them (“the Male”)  falsely accused her of causing his boss to lose money in investments and demanded her to pay compensation of $50,000.  X was slapped in the face, pushed onto the ground and stepped on her back.  The Male told X to call her friends to borrow money and she did but to no avail and so she could not pay up:  the 4^th charge of attempted robbery against the 1^st defendant.  X was also threatened with injuries to her person and the Male forced her to eat some grass there: the 5^th charge of criminal intimidation against the 1^st defendant.

20.  Later, the Male forced X to undress herself to become totally naked and to masturbate herself.  The Male took a video of that while D1 and others were lighting up the area with their phones for the video taking.  X did so as she was afraid of being beaten up: the 6^th charge of criminal intimidation against the 1^st defendant.

21.  Shortly later, another vehicle arrived and X heard the Male scolding and assaulting an unknown male victim.  The Male kept asking the male victim to borrow money from his friends and relatives to pay them: the 8^th charge of attempted robbery against the 1^st defendant.  X was then told to undress again and the male victim was ordered by threats or intimidation to lick X’s vagina and he did as demanded: the 7^th charge of procurement of unlawful sexual act by threats or intimidation against the 1^st defendant.  At that time, a video was taken of the unlawful sexual act.  X only co-operated because she was afraid of being beaten up. 

22.  Later, X was allowed to leave in a taxi and she reported the case to the police.

23.  During the incident, X did not sustain any obvious injuries.

Incident 5

24.  On 22 November 2020, a male victim was lured by a female to get into a taxi with her to go to a rural area in Yuen Long.  Upon arrival, the victim was assaulted by five males (including the 1^st and 2^nd defendants)  who punched and kicked him for about 5 minutes.  He was also beaten with a wooden stick.  One of the males alleged that the female owed them money and that the victim being her boyfriend should repay for her.  They took his five bank/credit cards and his mobile phone (valued at $3,500)  and he was forced to disclose the password of one of the bank cards ($2,900 was later withdrawn from his bank account): the 9^th charge of robbery against the 1^st and 2^nd defendants.

25.  The victim was also demanded to call his wife for money or else he would not be allowed to leave. He called his wife and she transferred a sum of $35,000 to an account held by the 4^th defendant (Hang Seng Bank (HSB)  account 777443763668): the 9^th charge of robbery against the 1^st and 2^nd defendants and the 13^th charge of conspiracy to deal with proceeds of an indictable offence against the 4^th defendant.  Later, when he was guarded by the 1^st and 2^nd defendants, the victim was again demanded to pay another $20,000 to ensure his safety and he would not be beaten up: the 11^th charge of blackmail against the 1^st and 2^nd defendants.  He complied and caused his wife to transfer a sum of $20,000 to the 1^st defendant’s HSBC bank account 805747755833: the 12^th charge of theft against the 1^st and 2^nd defendants. 

26.  During the incident, a male asked the victim to take off his clothes and photographs were taken of him naked.  The victim was also threatened not to call the police: the 10^th charge of criminal intimidation against the 1^st and 2^nd defendants.  He was later escorted into a taxi and was dropped off somewhere where he was permitted to leave.

27.  It was later discovered that 6 unauthorized transactions had been conducted with the use of the victim’s credit cards in the total sum of $24,983.22.

28.  During the incident, the victim sustained bruising over his vertex and left occipital scalp, left cheek, lateral aspect of left eyebrow, right scapular region at the back, right lower quadrant of abdominal wall and left arm; mild tenderness over his left face and back of neck; abrasions over back and right chest wall.  He was granted sick leave for 5 days.

Arrest of the 1^st, 2^nd and 4^th defendants

29.  The 1^st defendant was arrested on 25 November 2020.  Under verbal caution, he said he was not the mastermind; as he did not have money, he and others robbed people together.  In subsequent video-recorded interviews, he made further admissions of his involvement in incidents 3 to 5.

30.  The 2^nd defendant was arrested on 25 November 2020.  Under verbal caution, he stated that he was offered $3,000 to keep an eye on the victim in the 5^th incident.  In a subsequent video-recorded interview, he made further admissions of his involvement in the 5^th incident.

31.  The 4^th defendant was arrested on 21 January 2021.  Under verbal caution, she said she knew about the robbery.  She also admitted that she had lent her HSB bank card to “Ah Yu” and her HSBC bank card to “Ah Shu” in October/November 2020.  She also admitted that she was promised a reward but she received nothing in the end.

32.  In a subsequent video-recorded interview conducted on 21 January 2021, the 4^th defendant made further admissions under caution. 

33.  In relation to her HSB bank account, the 4^th defendant admitted that a female friend offered her a job with a 10% reward and she handed over a copy of her HSB bank card, her e-banking account number and password to the female friend to pass to other people for their use; then a male known as “Ah Yu” contacted her and applied a $100,000 bank loan for her and she was promised a reward of $10,000 if the loan was approved; and she passed her HSB bank card and the password to “Ah Yu”.  She did not receive any reward as the bank loan was never approved.

34.  In relation to her HSBC bank account, the 4^th defendant admitted that her female friend offered $2,000 per month for lending her the HSBC bank card and she was told that the account would be used for depositing and withdrawing online gambling related money; as she needed money, she handed over her bank card, online bank account number and account password to the female friend; and she was told that money going through her account would be money for illegal gambling.

HSB account 777443763668: the 13^th charge of conspiracy to deal with proceeds of an indictable offence against the 4^th defendant

35.  Bank records revealed that between 21 and 24 November 2020, there were 3 deposits totalling $44,800 made into the 4^th defendant’s HSB account (which was opened by her on 29 June 2020), including the sum of $9,000 being the crime proceeds arising from the 2^nd incident, and the sum of $35,000 being the crime proceeds arising from the 5^th incident.

HSBC account 166719773833: the 14^th charge of conspiracy to deal with proceeds of an indictable offence against the 4^th defendant

36.  Bank records revealed that between 17 November 2020 and 14 December 2020, there were altogether 23 deposits in the total sum of $220,136 made into the 4^th defendant’s HSBC account (which was opened by her on 27 October 2020).  Most of the deposits ranged from a few thousand to $30,000 and they included the total sum of $30,000 being the crime proceeds arising from the 2^nd incident.  Then out of those proceeds, a sum of $11,000 was transferred to the 1^st defendant’s HSBC account 805747755833: the 3^rd count of dealing with proceeds of an indictable offence against the 1^st defendant.

Background and Mitigation

The 1^st defendant

37.  The 1^st defendant was 21 years old at the time of the offences and is now 26 years old and single.  He was born in Hong Kong and has a clear record.  He was educated up to Form 4 level and he pursued a diploma in jewellery design.

38.  His counsel, Mr. Mak, submitted that there is no evidence that the 1^st defendant was the mastermind behind all the offences; and that he was being manipulated by his friends to take part in the offences with a view to make quick money.  Mr. Mak also submitted that he made full admissions and co-operated with the Police; and he pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity.  Mr. Mak invited the Court not to impose crushing sentences on this young man with a previous clear record.

The 2^nd defendant

39.  The 2^nd defendant was 21 years old at the time of the offences and is now 26 years old and single.  He was born in Hong Kong and has a clear record.  He was educated up to Form 3 level and he became a construction worker making around $12,000 per month.

40.  After he had been remanded for some three years and nine months, he was granted court bail in August 2024 and very soon he got back to work and has taken up various jobs ever since.  His counsel, Mr. Cheung, submitted that despite the sentencing being hanging over his head, the 2^nd defendant kept a commendable attitude to take positive steps to live a normal life.  The 2^nd defendant also pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity.

41.  Mr. Cheung submitted that the 2^nd defendant was only involved in one incident; he was asked by his friend to help out to beat up people with $3,000 as a reward and he was not the mastermind.

42.  Mr. Cheung advocated that an overall starting point of 8 years may be adopted by the Court to sentence the 2^nd defendant for his offences.

The 4^th defendant

43.  The 4^th defendant was 22 years old at the time of the offences and is now 27 years old.  She was born in Hong Kong and educated up to Form 2 level.  She became involved in drugs and was convicted of trafficking in February 2015 and sentenced to 9 years’ imprisonment.  In May this year, she was convicted of drug trafficking again (whilst on court bail for the present case)  and was sentenced to 52 months’ imprisonment.

44.  Her counsel, Ms Chan, submitted that the 4^th defendant pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity and has become a Christian and taken up bible study.  Ms Chan also submitted that there is no evidence to show that the 4^th defendant was involved in the robberies or attempted robberies; or that she knew her two bank accounts would be used to launder proceeds of such serious crimes. 

45.  Ms Chan advocated that the overall starting point for the 4^th defendant’s two offences should be no more than 2 years’ imprisonment.   

Sentence

1^st defendant

46.  I shall first deal with the 1^st defendant.  He has been convicted of a total of 12 offences involved in a total of 5 incidents in which victims were lured to remote places in the New Territories where they were assaulted, abused, threatened, robbed and/or blackmailed.  The victims were ordered to undress and nude photographs were taken of them which were later sent to their family members or relatives. The victims were subjected to violence and ill-treatment at the scene by a group of males and a weapon was often used in the assaults on the victims.  There were clearly aggravating factors in the robbery or attempted robbery in each of the five incidents: see R v Mo Kwong-sang [1981] HKLR 610.  It is also obvious that there was a criminal syndicate involved in the five incidents when the same modus operandi was used to rob and intimidate innocent victims.

47.  The 1^st defendant was involved in all five incidents: he took part in the robbery or attempted robbery in each of the 1^st, 3^rd, 4^th and 5^th incidents; and he laundered the proceeds of robbery arising from the 2^nd incident.  In my assessment, whilst he may not have been the mastermind, he was clearly an active member of the syndicate.  The offences committed by the 1^st defendant were quite serious indeed. 

48.  Given such serious and multiple offences committed by the 1^st defendant, his personal background or clear record does not have any weight in mitigation.  The only effective mitigation is his early pleas of guilty which will entitle him to a full one-third discount.

49.  Having considered the authorities supplied by the parties, I shall use the following starting points for the 12 charges against the 1^st defendant, to be discounted by one-third and arriving at the following sentences:

1st Charge	8 years’ imprisonment reduced to 5 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.
2nd Charge	6 years’ imprisonment reduced to 4 years’ imprisonment.
3rd Charge	3 years’ imprisonment reduced to 2 years.
4th Charge	9 years’ imprisonment reduced to 6 years’ imprisonment.
5th Charge	3 years’ imprisonment reduced to 2 years’ imprisonment.
6th Charge	5 years’ imprisonment reduced to 3 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.
7th Charge	7 years’ imprisonment reduced to 4 years and 8 months’ imprisonment.
8th Charge	9 years’ imprisonment reduced to 6 years’ imprisonment.
9th Charge	8 years’ imprisonment reduced to 5 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.
10th Charge	5 years’ imprisonment reduced to 3 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.
11th Charge	6 years’ imprisonment reduced to 4 years’ imprisonment.
12th Charge	3 years’ imprisonment reduced to 2 years’ imprisonment.

50.  Having considered the totality principle, I take the view that the overall discounted sentence to be imposed on the 1^st defendant should be 9 years and 6 months’ imprisonment.  To achieve that, I make the following orders: one year of the sentence for the 1^st Charge to run consecutively with that for the 4^th Charge; six months of the sentence for the 3^rd Charge to run consecutively with that for the 4^th Charge; one year of the sentence for the 8^th Charge to run consecutively with that for the 4^th Charge; one year of the sentence for the 9^th Charge to run consecutively with that for the 4^th Charge.  Subject to these orders, the sentences are otherwise to run concurrently.  In arriving at the overall sentence, I have taken into account his active role in the criminal syndicate.  The 1^st defendant is thus sentenced to an overall sentence of 9 years and 6 months’ imprisonment.

2^nd defendant

51.  The 2^nd defendant has been convicted of a total of 4 offences involved in one incident as a co-defendant with the 1^st defendant.  Whilst he was a member of the criminal syndicate, he only took part in one incident.  I shall use the following starting points for the 4 charges against the 2^nd defendant, to be discounted by one-third and arriving at the following sentences:

9th Charge	8 years’ imprisonment reduced to 5 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.
10th Charge	5 years’ imprisonment reduced to 3 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.
11th Charge	6 years’ imprisonment reduced to 4 years’ imprisonment.
12th Charge	3 years’ imprisonment reduced to 2 years’ imprisonment.

52.  Having considered the totality principle, I take the view that the overall discounted sentence to be imposed on the 2^nd defendant should be 5 years and 8 months’ imprisonment.  To achieve that, I order that four months of the sentence for the 11^th Charge to run consecutively with that for the 9^th Charge; subject to this order, the sentences are otherwise to run concurrently.  The 2^nd defendant is thus sentenced to an overall sentence of 5 years and 8 months’ imprisonment.

4^th defendant

53.  The 4^th defendant has been convicted of a total of 2 offences involved in two incidents.  I accept that she was not involved in the five incidents of robbery or attempted robbery but the crime proceeds arising from two of those incidents were laundered in her two bank accounts.  I also accept that at the material time, she was not aware that her bank accounts would be used to launder proceeds of such serious offences. 

54.  She does not have a clear record and her only effective mitigation is her early pleas of guilty.  I shall use the following starting points for the 2 charges against the 4^th defendant, to be discounted by one-third and arriving at the following sentences:

13th Charge	2 years’ imprisonment reduced to 1 year and 4 months’ imprisonment.
14th Charge	2 years’ imprisonment reduced to 1 year and 4 months’ imprisonment.

55.  Having considered the totality principle, I take the view that the overall discounted sentence to be imposed on the 4^th defendant should be 1 year and 10 months’ imprisonment.  To achieve that, I order that 6 months of the sentence for the 14^th Charge to run consecutively with that for the 13^th Charge.  The 4^th defendant is thus sentenced to an overall sentence of 1 year and 10 months’ imprisonment.

Exhibits

56.  An order in terms of the Prosecution’s amended application, not objected to by the Defence, was granted to dispose the exhibits.