HKSAR v. TANG LEONG TAK

DCCC1217/2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1217 OF 2009

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  Tang Leong-tak, you have been convicted on your own plea of the offence of criminal damage of a wooden door and the lock on a flat in Kwun Tong which was occupied by your former wife, Wong Shun-yi.

2.  The background to that offence is the turbulent relationship you had with your ex-wife.  You married her on 8 September 2006 when she was pregnant, though I understand not pregnant with your child.  You were both then aged 19.  After the birth of your wife’s first child, you went on to have a second child together. 

3.  It does not appear from what I have been told that you stayed in any accommodation during your marriage for any substantial length of time.  On a number of occasions, you and your wife lived with your parents but, apparently, there was often friction between your then wife and members of your family.  Eventually, you divorced in March 2009.  The marriage had only lasted two and a half years.

4.  On 25 August last year, Wong Shun-yi entered into a tenancy agreement for the flat, the door to which is the subject of this charge.  Despite the fact of your divorce, Wong Shun-yi gave you the keys to the flat so that you could visit the premises whenever you wished to see the children.  However, in the following month, on 16 September, Wong Shun-yi alleges that after she discovered that you had a new girlfriend, she demanded that you return the keys to the flat, but you did not do so.  Whether that is true or not, Madam Wong admitted that she had informed you on 27 September at around 5 pm that she had changed the lock on the door of the flat.  She admitted that prior to changing the lock on the flat, she had thrown away your clothing which was inside the flat but she had not informed you of that fact.  

5.  At around 11 pm, you telephoned her, saying you wanted to enter the flat to retrieve your clothing.  She was in Shatin with her boyfriend at the time and refused to return to the flat to allow you to enter. You then told her that if she refused to return to the flat and let you in, you would break open the door.  She did not return to the flat and you broke open the door with a metal hammer.  Wong Shun-yi only discovered this when she returned to the flat at 11 am.  The damage to the lock and the door was substantial and can be seen in the photographs I have been shown. 

6.  Mr Chan, your counsel, says that you committed the offence in a fit of anger.  I bear in mind that since you committed the offence, you have compensated the landlady in respect of the damage to the lock and the door.  It is, however, totally unacceptable to take the law into your own hands and damage property belonging to another out of anger towards your ex‑wife.

7.  This is not the first incident between you and your former wife that has come to the notice of the criminal courts.  On 11 February last year, you and your wife were bound over following an incident between you. 

8.  This sort of incident cannot recur.  It is for that reason despite the fact that you are a man of no previous convictions that I ordered a probation report.  The probation officer who compiled the report is of the view that this was an impulsive act on your part arising out of your relationship with your former wife and that probation is unnecessary.  I am pleased to see from the report that Miss Tse, the case worker of the Kwun Tong Integrated Family Service Centre, takes the view that in recent months you have been co‑operative and motivated to follow the advice that has been given to you by the centre.

9.  In view of the background to this offence and your previous good character, I do not consider it appropriate to impose a sentence of imprisonment on you on this occasion but rather deal with you by way of a fine.  In deciding the appropriate level of fine, I bear in mind that you have been declared bankrupt, but as part of the arrangements made in pursuance of that order, you are permitted around $7,000 a month for your own expenses.  I have been told by Mr Chan that you are in a position to pay $1,000 of that monthly sum towards any fine that this court imposes.

10.  I have also been told that the $5,000 which was deposited as security for your bail was lent to you by your brother and that that can be applied towards the payment of a fine.

11.  Bearing in mind these factors, I have decided that the appropriate fine in your case is one of $10,000.  With your consent, I order that $5,000 of that sum be paid forthwith from the bail money deposited in court.  The remaining $5,000 is to be paid by monthly instalments of $1,000, the first instalment to be paid on or before 1 December 2010, and thereafter the instalments are to be paid on or before the 1st day of each succeeding month until the total fine is paid.  There will be a term of 1 month’s imprisonment imposed in default of payment of any instalment.  Do you understand the terms of that order?

DEFENDANT: Yes.

12.  I am prepared to fine you, as I have said, on this occasion but I must warn you that if there is any repetition of this sort of conduct, you are likely to find yourself facing a term of imprisonment.  Do you understand that?

DEFENDANT: Understood.

13.  Very well.