HKSAR v. CHAN CHUN MING

DCCC 192/2025

[2026] HKDC 127

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 192 OF 2025

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

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

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

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

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

A. Charges

1.  The Defendant (“D”) pleaded guilty to 3 charges of dealing with property known or believed to represent proceeds of an indictable offence, contrary to s25(1) and (3) of the Organized and Serious Crimes Ordinance, Cap 455. The particulars are that he, in Hong Kong, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe that property in bank accounts, in whole or in part directly or indirectly represented any person’s proceeds of an indictable offence, dealt with the said property. The other particulars are as follows:

Charges	Dates	Accounts	Amount
1	1 August to 31 October 2022	The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited, account number 138-720669-833 (“Account 1)	HKD1,499,321.54
2	21 October to 3 November 2022	Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (Asia) Limited, account number 880-823-18431-0 (“Account 2”)	HKD1,067,777.06
3	15 December 2022 to 10 February 2023	Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) Limited, account number 313-8-516361-1 (“Account 3”)	HKD1,678,880 and USD149,991.60

B. Facts

2.  Pw1 to Pw3 were victims of fraud schemes. Pw1 was deceived to invest in forex through a bogus website, while Pw2, residing in the United States, and Pw3 were deceived by fraudsters, impersonating Mainland Chinese officials, that they were allegedly involved in criminal activities and that they had to provide funds to prove their innocence. The details of the losses of Pw1 to Pw3 and their remittances to Accounts 1 to 3 as a result of the schemes are as follows:

Pw	Account	Remittance to Accounts 1 to 3		Total loss
		Date	Amount
Pw1	1	29 August 2022	HKD400,000	HKD3,100,000
Pw2	2	2 November 2022	USD135,000	USD135,000
Pw3	3	10 January 2023	HKD238,000	HKD238,000

3.  Account 1 was opened in person by D with his HKID card on 9 July 2022. It was stated in the opening form that he was a part-time decoration worker with a monthly income of around HKD10,000 to 14,999.

4.  According to the transaction records of Account 1:

(a) it was dormant with a zero balance from 9 to 31 July 2022;

(b) from 1 August to 31 October 2022, it had 16 deposits totalling HKD1,499,321.54 (including HKD763,709.54 converted from a deposit of CAD127,000) and 33 withdrawals totalling HKD1,495,858.29;

(c) most of the deposits were withdrawn from the account on the same day they were made, resulting in mirror patterns and consistently low daily balances; and

(d) the account had a closing balance of HKD3,463.25 and has remained dormant since.

5.  Account 2 was opened in person by D with his HKID card on 21 October 2022 and closed on 11 January 2023.

6.  According to the transaction records of Account 2:

(a) from 21 October to 3 November 2022, it had 3 deposits totalling HKD1,067,777.06 (including HKD1,057,777.06 converted from Pw2’s remittance of USD134,992.30) and 8 withdrawals totalling HKD1,067,878;

(b) most of the deposits were withdrawn from the account on the same day they were made, resulting in mirror patterns and consistently low daily balances; and

(c) the account had a closing balance of HKD7.06 and has remained dormant since.

7.  Account 3 was opened in person by D with his HKID card on 7 July 2022 and closed on 17 April 2023.

8.  According to the transaction records of Account 3:

(a) it was dormant with a zero balance from 7 July to 14 December 2022;

(b) from 15 December 2022 to 10 February 2023, it had 16 deposits totalling HKD1,678,880 and USD149,991.60 and 31 withdrawals totalling HKD2,300,380 and USD150,053.44;

(c) most deposits were withdrawn on the same day they were made, resulting in mirror patterns and consistently low daily balances; and

(d) the account had a closing balance of HKD127.71 and USD12.12 and has remained dormant since.

9.  He did not file any tax return for 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 financial years.

10.  At all material times:

(a) D was in Hong Kong;

(b) he was the sole account holders and authorised signatories of Accounts 1 to 3; and

(c) he, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe that property, namely the monies deposited into Accounts 1 to 3, in whole or in part, directly or indirectly represented any person’s proceeds of an indictable offence, dealt with the said property.

C. Enhancement

11.  Prosecution (“P”) apply for enhancement of sentence under s27 of Cap. 455. Defence do not object and ask the Court to consider enhancing by 1/5 to 1/4 because the number of cases of this nature has recently decreased.

D. Criminal record

12.  D committed 19 criminal cases with no similar offence.

D. Mitigation

13.  D is aged 48 with Form 3 education. He was a part-time air-conditioner cleaner earning a monthly income of around HKD10,000, and providing her mother with a monthly allowance of HKD4,000 to 5,000. He has been unemployed since the COVID-19 pandemic.

14.  In around 2021, D was injured in a traffic accident and his back has suffered from pain since, requiring follow-up treatment at hospital every 6 months and medications on a regular basis.

15.  Defence cited HKSAR v Hsu Yu Yi [2010] 5 HKLRD 536, Secretary for Justice v Wan Kwok Keung [2012] 1 HKLRD 201, and HKSAR v Boma [2012] 2 HKLRD 33.

16.  Regarding the present case, Defence submitted that:

(a) the Charges periods are not the longest and the amounts involved are not the highest for this kind of offence;

(b) no complexity was involved;

(c) there is no evidence of criminal organisation or of D’s knowledge of the predicate offences.

17.  Defence ask the Court to consider a global starting point of less than 5 years for all charges.

E. P’s reply

18.  P submit that the Court may consider 4 to 4.5 years as the global starting point and an enhancement by 1/5 to 1/3.

F. Sentence

19.  I have also considered CAAR 4/2024 in which the Court of Appeal held the followings:[1]

(a) Sentencing judges should keep firmly in mind the mischief targeted by the relevant legislation, and take note of the maximum penalty for the offence and the need for a deterrent sentence.

(b) The amount involved is important but not the only factor. Wan Kwok Keung merely summarised the approximate sentencing ranges corresponding to the amounts in the cases listed by Hsu Yu Yi. Sentencing judges should not rely solely on those ranges, nor adopt a purely mathematical approach to sentencing without proper consideration of other case-specific factors. Judges must determine an appropriate term by assessing the particular circumstances of each case, drawing on their own sentencing experience, and their overall impression of the case.

20.  I have had regard to the following matters in the instant case:

(a) There is no evidence of sophisticated planning or steps, or criminal organisation.

(b) The predicate offences are online and telephone deceptions, but there is no evidence that D was aware of them.

(c) He was the holders of three stooge accounts.

(d) The periods of Charges 1 to 3 are 1 August to 31 October 2022, 21 October to 3 November 2022, and 15 December 2022 to 10 February 2023, respectively.

(e) The amounts involved in Accounts 1 to 3 are (i) HKD1,499,321.54, (ii) HKD1,067,777.06, and (iii) HKD1,678,880 and USD149,991.60, respectively, totalling about HKD5,500,000.

(f) Account 1 had 16 deposits and 33 withdrawals, Account 2 had 3 deposits and 8 withdrawals, and Account 3 had 16 deposits and 31 withdrawals.

(g) International element was involved as there were deposits of CAD into Account 1 and USD into Account 2 from Pw2 who resided in the United States.

21.  A global starting point of 4 years 3 months (51 months) is appropriate. It is reduced by 1/3 for the guilty plea to 34 months.

22.  I allow the application for enhancement. An extent of 1/5 is appropriate because it has been the recent trend in District Court cases involving stooge accounts for money laundering: [2024] HKDC 256,[2024] HKDC 1634, [2025] HKDC 133, [2025] HKDC 1782, and [2025] HKDC 2037.

23.  Hence, the global sentence is enhanced by 1/5 to 40 months.

24.  In view of the above, the sentences are as follows:

(a) The starting points for Charges 1 to 3 are 2.5 years (30 months), 2 years (24 months), and 3.5 years (42 months), respectively.

(b) They are reduced by 1/3 for the guilty plea to 20 months, 16 months, and 28 months, respectively.

(c) They are enhanced by 1/5 to 24 months, 19 months, and 34 months, respectively.

(d) To achieve the global sentence of 40 months, 4 months of the sentence of Charge 1 and 2 months of that of Charge 2 are to run consecutively to that of Charge 3, the rest of the sentences are to run concurrently.

(e) Hence, D is sentenced to 40 months’ imprisonment for all charges.