HKSAR v. LEUNG SIN HANG

DCCC 1581/2024

[2026] HKDC 371

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1581 OF 2024

________________________

________________________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

The defendant pleaded guilty to 3 charges of "Unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl under the age of 13 years" (Charges 1 to 3).

Summary of Facts

2.  X is a female born in July 2011.  The defendant was born in November 1982.  They first met through the "People Nearby" function of a mobile app WeChat in 2022 or 2023.  In May 2024, X, who was then 12 years and 10 months old, and the defendant reconnected on WeChat.

3.  On 17 June 2024, Madam Y (X's mother; PW2)  questioned X on her whereabouts after school.  X disclosed to PW2 that she was in contact with a man of about 30 years old.  PW2 made a voice call to the defendant, during which he admitted having seen X as a friend.

4.  On 29 June 2024, PW2 reviewed the WeChat record on X's cell phone and discovered text messages between X and the defendant containing unusual sexual connotations.

5.  On 30 June 2024, when questioned by PW2, X admitted that she had sexual intercourse with the defendant without a condom on several occasions, including once in his home at Kai Ching Estate.  PW2 then took X to a hospital for medical examination and alerted the police.

6.  On 4 July 2024, in a video recorded interview (VRI), X stated that she came to know the defendant about 1 or 2 years ago through the "People Nearby" function of WeChat.  They reconnected on WeChat in May 2024.  The defendant had told her that he was about 30 years old, and X had to him that she was 12.  X has also described 3 incidents of sexual intercourse with the defendant in her VRI. 

7.  On 29 May 2024, the defendant picked up X from school in his white private car ("the Car"). He drove to Silverstrand Mart Carpark, Tseung Kwan O and parked there.  They then moved to the backseat.  The defendant removed X's clothes and his own bottom wear.  They had sexual intercourse for about 10 minutes.  No condom was used.  X felt pain during intercourse, and it was her first time.  This is Charge 1.

8.  About 4:00 p.m. on a day in mid-June 2024[1], the defendant picked up X from school in the Car.  He drove to Maxgrand Plaza, San Po Kong.  The defendant took X to a disabled toilet.  After locking the door from inside, the defendant removed his pants and X's clothes.  He laid a mat on the floor and told X to lie down on it.  They had sexual intercourse.  Afterwards, they went to a stationery shop just to browse.  The defendant then drove X home.  This is Charge 2.

9.  About 4:00 p.m. on a day in early June 2024[2], the defendant picked up X from school in the Car.  They went to the defendant's home at Kai Ching Estate, Sau Mau Ping.  X was sitting on the sofa in the living room.  The defendant asked her to lie down on a mattress placed near the bed.  He removed his underpants and X's clothes.  They had sexual intercourse. No condom was used.  Afterwards, the defendant drove X home.  This is Charge 3.

10.  After the 3 incidents described above, X continued to see the defendant in mid-June 2024 because X's home was quite distant from her school.  The defendant could drive her home after school.

Arrest and admissions

11.  The defendant was arrested at his home on 5 July 2024.  Under caution, he said "May I ask what is going on?"

12.  In his video recorded interviews, the defendant claimed that X reached out to him on WeChat in April 2024.  They met up one day in May 2024 at Sceneway Plaza.  He claimed to have asked X if she was 14 years old and X nodded.  X also agreed to let the defendant be her boyfriend.  Regarding the 3 alleged incidents, the defendant admitted to having performed intimate acts with X, but denied having sexual intercourse with her.  The admitted intimate acts included touching X's breasts over her clothes, inserting fingers into X's vagina, masturbating in front of X, and having X touch the defendant's penis.

Mitigation & Sentence

13.  The defendant is 43 and has 1 conviction record, which was a "Loitering" offence (dated 2016).  Defence counsel Mr. Fong informed me that the defendant is married with a son (aged 8).  The 3 of them live in a public housing unit. The defendant has been a maintenance technician with MTR for 11 years, earning $25,000 per month.  He has received 2 awards from his employer for the quality of his work.

14.  In mitigation, Mr. Fong submitted that the defendant is a loving father, a caring husband and a filial son.  He has a stable job and a happy family.  He knows that he has made a serious mistake and has hurt everyone who cares about him. His wife has forgiven him.  She sees the defendant as a loving and helpful individual.  She believes that a momentary lust clouded the defendant's judgement. 

15.  Charges 1 to 3 are absolute liability offences[3]. Plainly, the legislative intent is to impose statutory protection on those of young age such as X.  It was apparent that X was too young to understand what romance means and was likely misguided by the car rides after school; however, the defendant knew full well that the law prohibits them from becoming intimate with each other.  The message sent by the legislature cannot be any clearer.

16.  At law, X was unable to give consent to engage in sexual intercourse with the defendant. Furthermore, the defendant's failure to use a condom constituted an aggravating factor.  What the defendant did was very wrong and could bring harmful results such as sexually transmitted diseases and teenage pregnancy to X.  The legislature believes that young girls like X cannot protect themselves, so the law steps in.

17.  The Victim's Impact Assessment Reports on X (dated 23 February 2026)  was placed before me.  The clinical psychologist made the following comments:

… [X] exhibited symptoms of anxiety, guilt, and emotional distress. She had nightmares in times and her mood was volatile with suicidal tendencies and self-harming behaviours… X's emotional problem also affected her daily functioning as she would skip school due to lacking of motivation[4].

… [X] was found to adopt a very low self-esteem in every aspect of her life, including the general, social and home-related aspects indicating that she perceived herself as a worthless person… X perceived herself making a mistake in the incidents so the occurrence of the offences further hindered her self-concept[5].

… The results from the present assessment suggest that the offences do have a detrimental effect on X's psychological functioning and her need of psychotherapy is indicated to deal with the impact arising from the offences[6]…

18.  When determining the appropriate sentence, I have borne in mind the sentencing principles for offences of sexual assault on a child[7] laid down by the Court of Appeal in HKSAR v Tsang Chiu Tak [2013] 1 HKLRD 427.  Taking into consideration of the relevant factors[8], particularly the age

gap between the defendant and X, I adopt a starting point of 2.5 years' imprisonment for each charge. I am not prepared to grant a discount more than the usual one-third[9]. Apart from this, I see no other mitigating factors which warrant any further reduction. With the timely guilty plea, I sentence the defendant to 20 months' imprisonment for each charge.

19.  Mr. Fong stressed that all 3 offences took place within a fortnight.  In my view, it matters not how close in time the 3 offences took place.  The harm caused to X is tripled when the crime was committed 3 times.  The defendant must be punished accordingly.

20.  Bearing in mind the totality principle, I consider a global starting point of 3 years' imprisonment appropriate for all 3 charges.  With the timely guilty pleas, the overall sentence becomes 2 years.  Hence, I order 2 months in Charge 2 to run consecutively to Charge 1; and 2 months in Charge 3 to run consecutively to Charges 1 and 2.  Thus, arriving at a total prison term of 24 months.