HKSAR v. LEE SZE MAN

DCCC1314/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1314 OF 2010

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to offence of burglary, contrary to section 11(1)(a) & (4) of the Theft Ordinance.

2.  You admitted that, on 5 November 2010, in Hong Kong, you entered, as a trespasser, part of a building known as “Toi Lau Restaurant” at the Tai Wo Shopping Centre in Tai Po, New Territories, with intent to steal therein.

3.  On 5 November, at about 5.10 am, Mr Ho, a personnel of the To Lau Restaurant, arrived there and pulled the building gate to the ground, but did not lock it, and began work at the bar preparing for the opening of the restaurant’s business at 6.00 am. 

4.  At about 5.40 am Mr Ho heard noise coming from the cashier counter of the restaurant.  He then saw you running out from the cashier counter.  He shouted at you, but you ignored him and continued to run out of the restaurant.  Mr Ho gave chase.  In the meantime Mr Ho had noticed that the rolling gate of the premises was then pulled up from the ground.

5.  Eventually you were intercepted and subdued by Mr Ho outside the restaurant.  You told Mr Ho you did not take anything from the premises.  Mr Ho recognised you as a former employee of the restaurant and made a report to the police.  The restaurant, however, did not suffer any loss. 

6.  At about 6.03 am a police officer arrived at the restaurant and, under caution, you admitted that you went into the cashier counter of the premises and tried to open a drawer of the cashier and steal money.

7.  Mr Yeung, your solicitor today, has made very full and thorough mitigation on your behalf, of which I have taken into account all that he has had to say. 

8.  You are aged 33 and, up until at least December of least year, you were a man of clear record.  In December of last year, just a month ago, you were sentenced for three offences - one blackmail and two for criminal damage for which you received 2 months' imprisonment.  I am informed by Mr Yeung that your commission of those offences is, in fact, related to the reason why you committed this present offence.

9.  In summary, the reasons are this.  You had been unemployed for a period of approximately six months prior to November 2010. Prior to that you had been working in restaurants since you completed Form 1. However, as a result of not having been employed for six months, you borrowed money from loan sharks to provide for your daily living.  By the end of October, early November, you had gone home to your parents, whom you live with, and asked to borrow money to make payment to the loan shark company.  However, they refused, and, as a result of their refusal, the offences of blackmail and criminal damage were committed by you upon them and at your home with them.  I am informed that the criminal damage was the insertion of a toothpick into the gate hole, and the language you had used  amounted to the blackmail charge.  You had not entered your home that day, however your mother and brother reported you to the police.  As you had nowhere to go, you then roamed the streets.  That is when you committed this present offence of burglary.

10.  Mr Yeung says that it was an opportunist crime. You had seen the restaurant there and went in attempting to steal to pay off your debts to the loan sharks.  You immediately admitted the commission of this offence when you were arrested and cautioned by the police officer.  You have, of course, shown your remorse before this court in pleading guilty to this offence.

11.  I am informed that you had owed approximately $15,000 to the loan sharks, and since your incarceration for the previous blackmail and criminal damage offences your family has repaid that sum. 

12.  Defendant, you have committed a burglary of a commercial premises, being a restaurant.  There are very clear guidelines from the Court of Appeal that for burglary of commercial premises the appropriate sentence after trial should be a starting point of 2½ years' imprisonment.  The strongest  mitigating factor in your case is, of course, your plea of guilty.  In those circumstances you should be given full credit for that, and that sentence should be reduced by one-third. 

13.  You will, therefore, be sentenced to a term of 1 year and 8 months' imprisonment for the present offence.