HKSAR v. ZHANG YICHEN

DCCC 1040/2023

[2024] HKDC 1329

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 1040 OF 2023

________________________

________________________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

1.  The defendant has pleaded guilty to three charges of obtaining property by deception, contrary to Section 17(1)  of the Theft Ordinance. Simply put, the facts show that some three items were obtained using two credit cards on three separate occasions on the same day at the same location. A further credit card was found in the vicinity of the defendant.

2.  Some details on those facts are the defendant is a two-way entry holder who came to Hong Kong on 3 June.  On 3 June 2023 in the afternoon, a police officer patrolling in Canton Road in Tsim Sha Tsui saw the defendant and another person described as a “wanted person” outside the Galleria by DFS in Canton Road in Tsim Sha Tsui.  The defendant was searched.  Two credit cards relating to other people were found on him, those are Exhibits 1 and 2.  A further credit card was found on the wanted person and was Exhibit 3.  Receipts relating to items purchased with the credit cards were also found.

3.  The investigation showed that the credit cards had been used to obtain E4, E5 and E6 and some free gifts that came with them.  These are cosmetics.  I am told the total value of these cosmetics is under $15,000.

4.  The defendant’s antecedents show that he is a person of clear record.  Mitigation shows that he is 30 years old, born inside the People’s Republic of China, married, has a daughter aged 9 and a son aged 5, educated to Secondary 1, working as a casual labourer earning around RMB6,000 per month.  As I said already, has a clear record in Hong Kong.

5.  The facts are straightforward.  There are cases which give guidance in respect of sentencing for cases involving obtaining property by deception through the use of genuine or forged credit cards.  There is no direct sentencing tariff for cases involving small-scale use of credit cards.  One can find some guidance in the case of HKSAR v Tu I Lang which is at CACC 464/2006 where the case relates to a small, unsophisticated operation involving one or a few forged credit cards uncomplicated by other evidence materially linking the defendant to a larger operation, a starting point of 3 years’ imprisonment or less is said to be appropriate.

6.  I have been referred to a more recent case of HKSAR v Li Chi Yat, another unreported case at CACC 189/2018 which adopted a 2 year starting point involving a single credit card which had been used to purchase a mobile phone under $8,000 and some attempts to purchase other items.

7.  As far as this case is concerned, we can see that it appears to be an opportunistic case of obtaining property by deception.  The products and the credit cards were recovered immediately by the police investigation, credit should go to that.  The offences occurred on the same day were at the same location.  There is no international dimension.  It is a small-scale operation and there seems to be no planning or elaboration of the operation itself.

8.  Taking those factors into account, I will take on each of the three charges a starting point of 2 years’ imprisonment or 24 months, that is subject to the defendant’s plea of guilty which had been indicated from an early stage, means that he gets a full one-third discount on each charge.  So for charge 2, charge 3 and charge 4, there will be a sentence of 16 months’ imprisonment.

9.  Given that these offences all occurred on the same day at the same location, I am going to order that they be served concurrently to a total of 16 months’ imprisonment.