|
DCCC1052/2009
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1052 OF 2009
----------------------
----------------------
| Date: |
27 October 2009 at 2.49 pm |
| Present: |
Ms Memi Ng, SPP of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
Mr Tam Lai Shing, of Messrs Li, Chow & Company, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Defendant |
-------------------------------------
Reasons for Sentence
-------------------------------------
1. The defendant has pleaded guilty to eight charges of theft and the charges were all committed between 18 April 2008 and 20 June 2008. The victim in each of the cases is Fullink Limited whom the defendant used to work for.
2. Mr Ko Ching-chung, PW1, is the owner of Fullink Limited. The company engages in trading plastic materials. Since 2003, the defendant has worked for the company as a sales representative. In June 2008, PW1 discovered that seven shipments of plastic materials which had been purchased from overseas suppliers and which had been purportedly sold to Chin Ngai Toys Industrial Limited (“Chin Ngai”) and Jaroen Import & Export Company Limited (“Jaroen”) between 18 April 2008 and 20 June 2008 by the defendant on behalf of Fullink had remained unsettled. PW1 made enquiries with the two companies and they both denied having placed the relevant purchase orders.
3. The victim confronted the defendant who admitted that he had stolen these seven shipments of plastic materials and sold them to Wing Hing Hong International Limited and Jenwell Enterprises Limited through a bogus company called Kam Yuen Plastic Factory. The defendant admitted that he had fabricated bogus purchase orders by using forged company chops and forged signatures of the companies on false shipment contracts. He also said that he had lost the proceeds in gambling and was unable to repay his employer.
4. The matter was reported to the police who searched the defendant’s home. At his home they found two Bank of China passbooks in the defendant’s name, several forged company shops including one for each of the companies Chin Ngai and Jaroen and also a forged company chop for a company called Grand Come Enterprises Limited and another one bearing the name of Kam Yuen. The persons in charge of Chin Ngai, Jaroen and Grand Come were shown the company chops and said that they were forged.
5. Having discovered the forged company chop of Grand Come, PW1 conducted further enquiries and found a purchase order purportedly placed by Grand Come handled by the defendant in May of 2008. Upon enquiry, Grand Come confirmed that no such order had been placed by them.
6. In total there were eight shipments of plastic materials belonging to Fullink stolen by the defendant and sold to WHH and Jenwell for a total of $2,655,032.80. The persons in charge of WHH and Jenwell confirmed that they had made the purchases of plastic materials from the defendant through a company called Kam Yuen. Apparently the defendant had told these two companies that Kam Yuen was a mainland company and requested them to make payments to that company by uncrossed cheques. They agreed to the defendant’s request and bank record showed that in total seven cheques were all issued to Kam Yuen or bearer in a total sum of $2,655,032.80 and all had been deposited into the defendant’s personal account with the Bank of China.
7. Although there were a total of eight shipments, I noted that two of the shipments, the subject of charges 2 and 3, were sold on one occasion to Jenwell.
8. Chin Ngai, Jaroen and Grand Come confirmed that no purchase orders for the above shipments of plastic materials had been placed by their companies at the material times. According to Fullink’s records of the eight shipments, only the purported shipment for Grand Come on 5 May 2008 had been settled.
9. The police interviewed the defendant and the interview was video-recorded. He admitted that the chops seized from his home had been forged, he had fabricated eight bogus purchase orders using the forged company chops, forging signatures and inducing Fullink to import plastic materials from overseas suppliers. He admitted that he had then sold the eight shipments of plastic materials to WHH and Jenwell in the name and company chop of a bogus company called Kam Yuen. He was only able to settle one of the payments for the shipment and that was the one purporting to be from Grand Come shipment. He said that WHH and Jenwell did not know the goods were stolen and they had settled payments for shipments by issuing cash cheques to Kam Yuen. He deposited all those cheques in his personal account with the Bank of China.
10. The defendant has a clear record. He is 40 years of age, he is married and at the time was living with his wife and two sons aged 10 and five. I am told that the defendant’s wife is a housewife. The defendant attended a college in Hong Kong and obtained a qualification in business administration. Since 1993, he has been involved in sales of industrial chemical materials.
11. I am told that his arrest in connection with these proceedings has had a devastating effect on his family and particularly on his wife. She is being treated for suicidal tendencies. I have a letter from the Hospital Authority from the Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital from the Psychiatry Unit there confirming his wife’s situation. She has been diagnosed as having “adjustment disorder with depressive features”.
12. The defendant was the sole breadwinner of the family and was earning about $10,000 per month. They lived in rented accommodation and he was paying $6,500 per month for rent. After his arrest, he obviously lost his job and they were receiving Comprehensive Social Security benefits of $11,000 per month.
13. I am told that the route of the defendant’s difficulty problem is his pathological gambling problem and I have had a letter from an organisation called Even Centre which is operated by the Tung Wah Group of Hospitals. They have confirmed that Mr Wong matches the manifestations of a person with pathological gambling problems. He has attended the Even Centre on a number of occasions for treatment and I am told by Even Centre that “He has reported the realisation of his problem, gambling, and reduction of irritation caused by gambling, stabilisation of emotion and reduction of gambling urge after receiving counselling”.
14. Counsel for the defendant says the defendant is very remorseful and he is particularly remorseful that he is unable to repay the moneys which he has spent on gambling. I am told that he had taken out loans to finance his gambling problems and he was unable to repay those loans.
15. I am told in mitigation there is only one victim in this case and the period of criminality was relatively brief, it was just over two months. The criminality in each case is the same and I am asked to deal with the defendant in a lenient manner.
16. The defendant was employed as a sales representative by the victim company. It is noted that the defendant had gone to some trouble to organise these thefts. He had forged company chops made and there were bogus purchase orders, forged signatures and false shipment contracts. The sum involved is considerable, it is in excess of $2.6 million, none of which is going to be repaid.
17. In respect of the charges, I note that although the value of the property stolen is not stated in the charges, I note from the summary of facts that for seven of the thefts the value of the property varies between $248,000 to $327,000. As regards to the 6th charge, the value of the property stolen is over $600,000.
18. In respect of all of the charges except charge 6, I take as a starting point a sentence of 2 years’ imprisonment and I reduce those sentences to one of 16 months’ imprisonment in respect of each of those seven charges.
19. As regards to the 6th charge, I take a starting point of 2½ years’ imprisonment and I reduce that by one-third to reflect the defendant’s guilty plea. That will therefore be reduced to one of 20 months’ imprisonment.
20. I have considered the question of totality. As I say, the sum involved in this case is in excess of $2.6 million. I propose to take a starting point of 4 years’ imprisonment and reduce that by one-third to 32 months’ imprisonment to reflect the guilty plea.
21. For each of the seven charges where 16 months has been imposed, I impose 16 months on the 1st charge, 16 months on the next four charges with 2 months on each of those offences being consecutive.
22. On the 6th charge, the sentence of 20 months, I order that 4 months of that sentence run consecutive to the previous five charges.
23. On charges 7 and 8, the 16 month sentences, I order that 2 months on each of those offences run consecutive to the previous sentences.
24. The total sentence will therefore be one of 32 months’ imprisonment.
|