HKSAR v. CHEE TSUN YIN, JACKSON

DCCC 342/2018

[2018] HKDC 1312

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 342 OF 2018

____________

____________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

1.  Chee Tsun Yin, Jackson, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of burglary of Shop A62(A) situated on the Ground Floor of Kwai Chung Plaza, Nos. 7-11 Kwai Foo Road in Kwai Chung, contrary to section 11 of the Theft Ordinance[1].

2.  Full particulars of the offence are set out in the facts admitted by you today.  In summary last year you were employed by the shop as the person in charge of the morning shift.   You were given keys to the roller shutter of the shop and the drawer near the cashier counter.  You resigned on 14 December last year without returning the keys. 

3.  On 27 December last year at about 11:30 p.m. Mr Cheung, the owner of the shop, secured the drawer containing $3,000 cash and the roller shutter.  At around 12 p.m. the next day Mr Cheung returned to the shop and found the roller shutter and drawer unlocked.  The $3,000 left in the drawer was missing.  The shop’s CCTV camera was also missing.

4.  CCTV footage revealed that at around 6:48 a.m. that morning you had left home and went to the shop.  At around 7:02 a.m. you entered the shop and left three minutes later and returned home. 

5.  Under caution and in a subsequent video recorded interview you admitted, inter alia, that when you resigned you did not return the keys; you had no job and was running out of money; you returned to the shop and used the keys to enter the shop and open the drawer; you stole the $3,000 from the drawer and the shop’s CCTV camera; and that you put the $3,000 under your pillow and disposed of the keys and the CCTV camera near the Cheung Fat Estate Promenade.

6.  The police recovered the $3,000 from your home.

Mitigation

7.  In passing sentence, I have carefully considered everything said on your behalf by Mr Tam including that you are remorseful and that whilst on bail you have secured further employment with Top One Surveying Engineering. 

8.  I have considered your mitigation letter together with the mitigation letters written by your parents; your elder brother and your employer, who speaks very highly of you and is willing to employ you again.   

Starting point

9.  The correct starting point for a single burglary of non-domestic premises committed by a first offender of full age where there are no aggravating or mitigating features is 2 years and 6 months imprisonment.

Aggravating features

10.  I am satisfied that the use of the keys retained after resigning is an aggravating feature of sentence.  In HKSAR v Sim Ka Wing the Court of Appeal said that a modest enhancement was appropriate where the offence involved the use of knowledge about the burgled premises acquired while working there[2].  I enhance the starting point by 3 months to 2 years and 9 months’ imprisonment.

11.  Giving you full credit for your plea of guilty you are convicted and sentenced to 1 year and 10 months’ imprisonment.