HKSAR v. MA ZHANBIN

DCCC 801/2025

[2026] HKDC 1347

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 801 OF 2025

________________________

________________________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of "Money laundering". In short, he lent his bank account to someone.

Summary of Facts

2.  On 29 April 2024, the defendant personally opened an account (No.57412057244)  with Standard Chartered Bank (the "SCB Account"), which was held in the name of Feihongx Limited ("FL").  According to the opening mandate, the defendant was a director of FL, which claimed to be engaged in the bathroom products business and had a correspondence address in Shenzhen.

Romance scam

3.  In 2024, Mr. Liu (PW1), a US resident, met someone on WeChat who persuaded him to open an investment account to trade Bitcoin as part of an online romance scam.  Between 14 March and 25 June 2024, PW1 transferred a total sum of US$3.8 million to various bank accounts, including a sum of US$249,435.13 to the SCB Account on 25 June 2024.  When PW1 was unable to recover his funds from the bogus investment account, he reported the matter to the police.

Deposits and withdrawals

4.  Between 18 and 30 June 2024, the SCB Account received 16 deposits, which aggregated to a sum of US$1,485,243.85 (including the US$249,435.13 from PW1).  Simultaneously, an aggregated sum of US$1,312,527.75 was withdrawn from the SCB Account by 8 transactions.

5.  Neither the defendant nor FL had filed any tax return in Hong Kong covering the offence period.

6.  Fund flow analysis conducted by the police showed that once deposited into the SCB Account, all the funds were consolidated and siphoned off, which is an indicator of money laundering.  The SCB Account was used as a temporary repository of funds.

7.  The defendant was arrested on 25 December 2024.  In his video recorded interview, the defendant claimed to be a salesperson, earning RMB50,000 per month.  He denied that FL was set up by him and claimed that the contact details contained in the opening mandate of the SCB Account were not his.  He, however, claimed that he did sign something similar in the mainland when acting as an immigration guarantor, for which he received RMB1,500 as his reward.

Mitigation & Sentence

8.  The defendant is 34 and has a clear record.  He is a mainland resident and holds a Two-Way Permit.  Defence counsel Mr. Li informed me that the defendant is married with a daughter (aged 5).  He worked as a car salesman.  Mr. Li explained that the defendant had allowed other people to use the SCB Account.  When he opened the SCB Account and allowed others to use it, he had reasons to believe that the SCB Account would be used for criminal activities.  In mitigation, Mr. Li submitted that the defendant's daughter suffers from Short Stature.  He came to Hong Kong to borrow money from a friend to fund his daughter's medical expenses.

9.  The prosecution has applied for an enhanced sentence pursuant to section 27(2)(c)  and (d)  of the Organized and Serious Crimes Ordinance (Cap.455)  on the basis of prevalence as well as the nature and extent of harm caused to the community. Mr. Li did not object but stressed that the relevant statistics show a decreasing trend.

10.  I bear in mind the Court of Appeal's decision in HKSAR v Xu Mai Qing CACC 464/2005, whereas Yeung JA (as he then was)  held "Under section 27(11)  of OSCO, what the prosecution has to prove is the prevalence of the offence, not the increase in the number of such offences[1]."

11.  I have read the witness statement of CIP Li dated 22 June 2026. I am satisfied that in 2024, deception-related money laundering cases were prevalent in Hong Kong in terms of the number of cases as well as the total value of monetary loss.

12.  There is clear and cogent evidence before me that money laundering through bank accounts opened by "ML Stooges" remains widespread in Hong Kong today. The court must send a clear message to the general public that people who play the role of "ML Stooge" will receive severe punishment, so that there is a deterrent effect. When there are few or no willing "ML Stooges", criminal activities which rely on their bank accounts will fail.

13.  This is a typical case of money laundering by way of a stooge bank account. The romance scam against PW1 would have been meaningless without the SCB Account. Given the defendant's role, the total sum which went through the SCB Account and the overall circumstances, I grant the prosecution's application and will enhance the sentence by 20%.

14.  The Court of Appeal in SJ v Wan Kwok Keung [2012] 1 HKLRD 201 held :-

Generally, the sentence for "money laundering" offences should mainly reflect the amount of "black money" laundered and not the benefit obtained by the defendant or others. The reason being that it is very difficult to prove the benefit concerned, and in most "money laundering" cases, there may not be evidence to show from what indictable offence the "black money" are in fact derived. Of course, if there is information to prove that the "black money" is originated from serious crimes, including drug trafficking, kidnap and blackmail, illegal human trafficking, other organized crimes, etc. or the defendant's benefit is huge, then the sentence should be adjusted upward.[2]

15.  In determining the proper starting point, I have reminded myself of the sentencing principles laid down in HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] 5 HKLRD 545 and HKSAR v Boma Amaso [2012] 2 HKLRD 33. I have also borne in mind the amount of money involved, the duration of the offence, the defendant's role in relation to the movements of funds as well as his personal circumstances.

16.  In SJ v Ngai Fung Sin Apple [2013] 5 HKLRD 104, Yeung V-P held :-

Neither the fact that the "illicit/black money"was actually not derived from an indictable offence nor the defendant's ignorance of the actual source of the "illicit/black money" is necessarily a valid mitigating factor…[3]

17.  I accept there is no evidence showing that the defendant was involved in the romance scam against PW1. What he did, however, went beyond merely opening a bank account. He brought in a company, thereby adding another layer to the concealment of the fraudster's identity. Also, the defendant should have retained ultimate control of the SCB Account and paid attention to its transactions on a regular basis. Finally, I cannot overlook the fact that a total sum of almost US$1.5 million (equivalent to HK$11.6 million odd[4])  went through the SCB Account within a fortnight.

18.  By opening a bank account for others and allowing them to use it, the defendant enabled funds of unknown origin or proceeds of crime to pass through the SCB Account. He played a pivotal role in helping the mastermind(s)  of criminal activities to access their illegal funds without revealing their identities.

19.  Time and again, the courts in Hong Kong have made it abundantly clear that financial difficulties, however serious, or the illness of a family member, however grave, do not constitute mitigating factors for committing a crime. It is also an aggravating factor when mainlanders come to Hong Kong to assist a fraud syndicate. I am sympathetic to the defendant's daughter's illness, but he should have contemplated the adverse impact of his criminal conduct on his family.

20.  I consider a starting point of 5 years' imprisonment appropriate and just[5]. With the timely guilty plea, the sentence is reduced to 40 months. Apart from this, I see no other mitigating factors which warrant any further reduction. With the 20% enhancement, I sentence the defendant to 48 months' imprisonment.