HKSAR v. WONG SHUK YIN

DCCC 1081/2025

[2026] HKDC 1395

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 1081 OF 2025

________________________

________________________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

1.  The defendant was charged with 2 counts of ‘dealing with property known or believed to represent proceeds of an indictable offence’, contrary to section 25(1)  and (3)  of the Organized and Serious Crimes Ordinance, Cap 455, more commonly known as the “money laundering” offence. She pleaded guilty to charge 1, agreed to the facts and was duly convicted of the charge. Charge 2 is to be left on the Court’s file and not to proceed with without the leave of the Court.

Facts

2.  It is alleged that the defendant, together with other persons unknown, used her bank account for money laundering purposes.

3.  On 8 November 2022, the defendant opened a bank account with the Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong)  Limited (“the Account”)  in person.  At all material times, she was the sole account holder and authorised signatory.

4.  Between 18 and 25 November 2022, 4 victims of fraud offences were enticed to transfer funds amounting to a total sum of HKD 228,000 into the Account.

5.  Between 9 November 2022 and 28 November 2022, 123 deposits totalling HKD 4,447,442 were deposited into the Account. During the same period, 105 withdrawals totalling HKD 4,447,386 were withdrawn. Suspicious transaction patterns were noted in the Account including (i)  withdrawals were made promptly after monies were deposited into the Account with mirroring and layering patterns; (ii)  day-end balances of the Account were consistently low and (iii)  sudden dormancy of the Account.

6.  The Account was, therefore, used as a temporary repository of funds between 9 November 2022 and 28 November 2022. 

7.  The defendant was arrested on 23 May 2023. Under caution, she claimed to have lent the Account to a friend who was a bankrupt.  

OSCO application

8.  In view of the prevalence of money laundering activities through the use of stooge accounts and the nature and extent of the harm caused to the community by the recent occurrences of such offences, the prosecution applied to the court for the enhancement of sentence pursuant to section 27(2)  of the Organized and Serious Crimes Ordinance. In support of its application, the prosecution furnished a written statement prepared by Chief Inspector Lee Yiu Nam of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Risk Assessment of the Financial Intelligence and Investigation Bureau dated 17 July 2026 (“the Statement”).

9.  According to Table A in paragraph 16 of the Statement, cases involving deception and money laundering activities increased from 16,643 cases in 2020 to 47,701 cases in 2025. Between January and May 2026, there were also 18,765 cases of this nature. The number of stooges arrested increased from 760 in 2020 to 7,883 in 2024. By 2025, the figures have slightly declined, but as of May this year, 2,511 stooges have been arrested. As analysed by Chief Inspector Lee in paragraph 19, the trends show that the use of stooge remains prominent. 

10.  It is further noted that the reported monetary losses and proceeds laundered in respect of deception and money laundering cases are highly substantial. The reported losses and/or amount of proceeds laundered dropped from the peak of over HKD 36.6 billion in 2022 to over HKD 7.6 billion in 2025, and the total amount recorded in the first 5 months of 2026 is HKD 1.835 billion. 

11.  Chief Inspector Lee stated that the use of stooge accounts for money laundering purposes had caused serious disruption to the normal functioning of the banking system; and had brought disrepute to Hong Kong as an international financial centre.  Moreover, the stooge accounts act as multiple layers of ‘shields’ concealing the identity of the criminal masterminds, rendering it more difficult for police in its investigations and facilitating the masterminds to evade criminal liabilities more easily.

Defendant's antecedent and mitigation

12.  The defendant, aged 40, has one previous criminal conviction of theft in 2006. 

13.  Mr Chan, counsel for the defendant, informed the Court that the defendant has completed secondary education. She worked as a salesperson and resided with her younger brother. She is separated from her husband and her 2 sons, aged 12 and 13, from the marriage are living with their father.   

14.  Mr Chan stated that the defendant had no knowledge of the predicate offence of fraud and she had turned a blind eye to the use of the Account by others. He also furnished the Court with authorities, including HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] 5 HKLRD 545, SJ v Wan Kwok Keung [2012] 1 HKLRD 201 and HKSAR v Boma [2012] 2 HKLRD 33. In these cases, the Court of Appeal set out factors relevant to the sentencing of money laundering offences.

15.  Mr Chan does not oppose the prosecution’s application for an enhancement of sentence but asks that the extent of enhancement be limited to 20 percent.

Sentence

16.  Money laundering is a serious offence, the maximum sentence for which is 14 years’ imprisonment and a fine of HKD 5 million.

17.  While the Court of Appeal provides no sentencing guidelines, as the facts vary from case to case, it laid down factors to be considered by sentencing judges. In Hsu Yu Yi, the Court of Appeal held that relevant factors include: the amount of money involved; the defendant’s level of participation and the number of occasions on which he is involved; in the event that the predicate offence could be identified, the court could take into account the sentence imposed on it per se; whether the case involved is an international element; and the length of time the offence lasted. 

18.  In the later case of  Boma, the Court of Appeal also provided a non-exhaustive list of such factors for consideration, which include: the nature of the predicate offence; the state of the offender’s knowledge; whether there is an international or cross border dimension; the sophistication of the offence; whether the offence involved an organized criminal syndicate; the number of transactions and the duration of the offence; whether the offender continued to launder funds after he had discovered the nature of the offence; and his role and the acts performed by him.

19.  In Wan Kwok Keung（雲國強）, the Court of Appeal stated:

“15. In HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] 5 HKLRD 536, Cheung JA set out the amount of money involved and the sentences passed in a number of money laundering cases. The sentencing starting point is 3 years or so where the “black money” involved is between 1 million and 2 million dollars, 4 years or so where it is between 3 million and 6 million dollars and could be over 5 years where it is above 10 million dollars.”

20.  In the recent case of Secretary for Justice v Xie Zhijian （谢志建） CAAR 4/2024, the Court of Appeal stated that the amount of money involved is not the main consideration for sentencing.  The Court should have given regard to the overall circumstances or impression of the case (paragraphs 52 to 54 of the judgment).

21.  In the present case, the defendant, together with others, laundered HKD 4,447,442 in 20 days. There is nothing to suggest that she knew anything about the predicate offence of fraud and there is no international element. Considering the above-mentioned sentencing principles and the culpability of the defendant, I adopt a starting point of 39 months’ imprisonment.

22.  The defendant made a timely plea of guilty and is, therefore, entitled to a full one-third discount in sentence. The sentence is reduced to 26 months’ imprisonment accordingly.  

23.  I am satisfied that the use of stooge accounts in money laundering activities is still prevalent and the harm caused to the community by recent occurrences of money laundering offence remains substantial. I allow the application by the prosecution for enhancement of sentence. I enhance the sentence by 5 months (representing an enhancement of slightly under 20%)  to act as an additional deterrent against the defendant and other stooges.

24.  The defendant is sentenced to a term of 31 months’ imprisonment.