HKSAR v. DUWI TRI YULIANA

DCCC 781/2022

[2023] HKDC 1060

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 781 OF 2022

________________________

________________________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

1.  The defendant pleaded guilty to one count of theft, contrary to section 9 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap. 210.

Facts

2.  The Re-Amended Summary of Facts dated 22 July 2023 set out the details of the case to which the defendant admitted.  I am not going to repeat all the details here.  

3.  In gist, Ms. Ma Siu Mei employed the defendant as domestic helper since July 2019.  Between July 2021 and 11 March 2022, the defendant stole a total of 46 items from Ms. Ma, including over 30 items of jewellery and cash in different currencies.  The total value of missing properties is about HK$771,507.  Investigation revealed that 5 missing items were recovered in the defendant’s room and the defendant had pawned some of the items to pawn shops.

Mitigation

4.  The defendant is aged 33, single and was born in Indonesia.  Her father and 2 younger sisters live in Indonesia.  Her mother passed away in November 2022.

5.  The defendant came to Hong Kong to work as a domestic helper since 2011.  She has a clear record in Hong Kong.

6.  In mitigation, it was stated that the defendant started to work for Ms. Ma’s family since 2019.  In 2018, her mother suffered from lung disease and the defendant kept sending more and more money for her medication.  Out of greediness and stupidity, the defendant started stealing and committed the present offence.  The defendant sold the stolen properties and remitted all proceeds, around HK$100,000 odd in total, to her family in Indonesia.  The defendant is extremely remorseful now.  She is sorry that she had hurt and disappointed Ms. Ma and her family.

Sentence

7.  The present case relates to theft involving breach of trust.  The Court of Appeal has set out sentencing tariff in respect of this type of offence.  According to the sentencing tariff and given the total value of the stolen properties amounts to over HK$750,000, I consider the appropriate starting point to be 33 months’ imprisonment.  While a few stolen items were recovered in the defendant’s room, they only amount to less than 5% of the total value of the stolen properties.  Further, the defendant is not in a position to compensate Ms. Ma for her loss.  Apart from the defendant’s guilty plea, there is no other mitigation factor in this case.  Given the defendant’s plea, the sentence is reduced to 22 months’ imprisonment.