HKSAR v. SO SHING CHUN

DCCC841/2012

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 841 OF 2012

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  Defendant, you have pleaded guilty to a single offence of dealing with cargo with intent to assist another person to export cargos without a manifest, contrary to section 18A(1)(c) of the Import and Export Ordinance, Cap. 60. You admitted the brief facts and I convicted you.

2.  What happened is this.  On 16 March of this year, at about 2351 hours, a seven-seater private car dropped off six to seven males at the promenade of Sai Wan Tsui.  It then left. 

3.  At about 2355 hours two private cars, PE 1005, vehicle 1, driven by you, and MA 9829, vehicle 2, driven by an unknown male, arrived at the promenade of Sai Wan Tsui, Sai Kung, and two speedboats were seen approaching.  At about 008 hours on 17 March this year vehicle 2 approached the shore with it’s rear facing the sea.  Vehicle 1 also parked next to it with its rear facing the sea. 

4.  At about 0012 hours six to seven males removed cartons onto the speed boat which was stopped near the shore.  The police and Customs Officers then revealed their identities and the males boarded the speedboat and headed east.

5.  PC 467, who was PW1, and Sergeant 926, PW2 were laying in ambush about 50 metres away.  They approached vehicle 1 and you opened the door and fled.  Rather foolishly, you jumped into the sea, but you were rescued fortunately by the police.  The seven-seater, vehicle 1, which was driven by you, was seized and inside were found the following items: 178 tablet computers; 4235 used mobile phones of various brands; 256 digital cameras; 114 kilograms of used computer chips; 48 kilograms of electronic components; 8 wired stereo headsets; 19 mobile phone pockets; 18 chargers; and 91 fibre channel host bus adapters.  There was also a box of 345 used mobile phones of assorted brands found next to your vehicle.  The total value of the goods seized that were in connection with you, including the vehicle you drove, was $2,678,244. Inside Vehicle 2 there were digital goods, mainly hard discs of about $1,813,414 seized.  The total value of the seizure for this case was about $4,511,658.

6.  You admitted to two previous convictions, both of some age, and neither being similar.  On your behalf Mr Chung entered mitigation.  He told me that you are 39 years of age.  You are married and your wife is 38 and employed.  At the time of the offence you were employed on a casual basis as a driver and earned on average about $6,000 per month.  He went on to tell me that now you have improved your condition to a large extent by working now in landscaping, earning $500 a day, which works out to about $10,000 a month. 

7.  As I understand it, you are employed by your uncle.  A letter was produced to court stating that you were a diligent and good worker and that the position was being held open for you to return to once released from prison.  I am told that your younger sister and your father reside with you.  They are in receipt of CSSA.  Your father is in poor health, and a medical report was produced to me.  Mr Chung told me that your father relies upon you for support.  He then turned to the offence itself.

8.  You were employed as a driver to drive this vehicle and would earn $600.  Very fairly and honestly you concede that you knew that this was a smuggling operation.  Mr Chung also referred to the various items and pointed out that several of them were in fact used goods and therefore of less value.  This is especially related to the mobile phones and to the computer chips.  He told me that you intended to turn over a new leaf and to use your time in prison usefully to acquire better life skills.  At the time of the commission of the offence your now wife had been your girlfriend. Despite this matter she had stood by you, and you married in September.  He pointed out whilst you have two previous convictions they are not of a similar nature, and I accept that. 

9.  I turn now to the sentence itself.  From the authorities it is clear that this must attract an immediate sentence of imprisonment.  I take into account that you are of a light record, and it appears that once you were saved from the sea that you were cooperative with the authorities.  You were presented before me as a good family man and a good worker.  It is of some significance that your wife is standing by you and your employer is prepared to keep your job open.  I accept your expression of remorse as being sincere. 

10.  Taking all matters into account, including the two authorities that were placed before me, that was HKSAR v So Sung Loi & Ors CACC 115/2007 and HKSAR v Yip Shuk Tat CACC 496/2000. Both of those cases refer to immediate custodial sentences.  As I said, taking all matters into account I take as a starting point 15 months’ imprisonment, reduced to 10.

11.  You will go to prison for 10 months.