HKSAR v. WONG YUK LUN

HCCC 415/2024

[2025] HKCFI 3651

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 415 OF 2024

________________________

________________________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

The Charge

1.  On 28 November 2024, the defendant pleaded guilty in the magistracy to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4(1)(a)  and (3)  of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Cap. 134.  The count involved 464.9 grammes of a solid containing 384.6 grammes of cocaine.  On the same day, the defendant admitted a Summary of Facts dated 1 November 2024 and he was committed to the Court of First Instance for sentencing.  Today, before this Court, the defendant confirmed his guilty plea to the trafficking count and his admission of the Summary of Facts.

Facts Admitted

2.  The facts of the case can be summarized as follows. 

3.  On 22 October 2023, a police officer saw the defendant alighting from a taxi outside an exit of Nam Cheong MTR Station.  As he was acting furtively, he was intercepted by the police officer.  The defendant was holding a black plastic bag at that time and upon search, two bags both containing suspected dangerous drugs (Pl and P2)  were found inside.

4.  The defendant was arrested and under caution, he admitted that as he owed others money, he delivered cocaine for others to settle his debt.

5.  A house search was conducted at the defendant’s residential flat in Kwai Chung.  A black plastic box, a pair of scissors, 2 cutters, and numerous transparent re-sealable plastic bags were found on the defendant’s bunk bed in the living room.

6.  Pl and P2 were subsequently examined and found to contain a total of 464.9 grammes of a solid containing 384.6 grammes of cocaine.  The total estimated retail value of Pl and P2 was $461,181 (for powder cocaine)  or $494,189 (for crack cocaine).

7.  In the Summary of Facts, the defendant also admitted that he was unlawfully trafficking in the dangerous drugs at the material time.

Background and mitigation

8.  The defendant was born and raised in Hong Kong and is now aged 30.  He completed his secondary education up to Form 6 and worked in various industries after graduation. Prior to his arrest, he was working as a casual worker at a construction site, earning $20,000 per month.  He is a married man, and his wife is a housewife aged 34 and they have a son aged 8.  After their marriage, the defendant, his wife and son lived in Shenzhen and the defendant provided $10,000 per month for living expenses.  The wife and son did not apply for residency in Hong Kong and the defendant returned to live in Hong Kong.  In Hong Kong, the defendant’s family includes his parents, aged 60 and 57 respectively.  Despite being in very poor health, his father works as a construction worker to earn money to cover the family’s expenses.  His mother is a housewife with heart problems, and his brother a warehouse clerk.

9.  His counsel, Mr. Michael Cheung, informed the Court that the defendant now realizes that he was extremely foolish in committing the offence.  He had been unemployed since July 2021.  Due to the economic downturn caused by the pandemic, he faced financial difficulties.  In order to support his family, he had borrowed over $100,000 from loan sharks at high interest rates.  Being unable to repay the loan, he committed the offence at the instigation of a friend in order to make some quick money.  He now fully understands the seriousness of his crime and is willing to bear responsibility for his mistakes.  He has therefore pleaded guilty and hopes to be released from prison as soon as possible to be reunited with his family and to start a new life.

10.  Mr. Cheung urged the Court to take into account the defendant’s guilty plea, his family background, as well as his lack of prior criminal record, and impose a most lenient sentence. Two letters were submitted to the Court in mitigation, one written by the defendant himself and the other by his mother. 

11.  In his own letter, the defendant expressed his genuine remorse for having committed the offence and asked for the Court’s leniency so that he may have more time to make compensation to his family members.  He also promised to be a law-abiding person and make contributions to the society in the future. 

12.  In her letter, the defendant’s mother confirmed that both herself and her husband suffered from serious ailments and had to incur medical expenses; and the defendant, being a filial son, wanted to alleviate their financial pressure, was lured by others into unlawfully trafficking in dangerous drugs.  The mother confirmed the defendant’s deep remorse and his determination to reform himself by taking up various training courses whilst in prison.  She asked for a second chance to be given to the defendant to start over again and to make up for his past mistakes.

Sentence

13.  In sentencing the defendant, I will follow the six steps as set out in HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290, bearing in mind also the Court of Appeal’s guidance in HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho [2024] 1 HKLRD 1186.

14.  The first step is to identify the relevant guideline band applicable to the quantity of the dangerous drugs in question.  In the present case, Mr. Cheung accepted that with the total quantity of 384.6 grammes of cocaine, the starting point should be a term of about 14 years and 5 months’ imprisonment: see HKSAR v Huang Ruifang [2025] 2 HKLRD 138 at §62.  Ms Winnie Mok, counsel acting for the prosecution, also confirmed that to be the correct starting point by a purely arithmetic calculation based on the tariffs.

15.  The second step is to assess the role and culpability of the defendant based upon the Summary of Facts before the Court.  In short, the defendant was seen alighting from a taxi and conveying the dangerous drugs in a bag.

16.  The third step is to decide where within the relevant guideline band the defendant should come.  In my assessment, the defendant’s role was that of a courier.

17.  The fourth step is to deal with aggravating factors, if any.  The defendant has a clear record.  I do not find any aggravating factors applicable to the present case.

18.  The fifth step is to consider the mitigating factors, if any.  As Mr. Cheung accepted, given the seriousness of the offence, the only strong mitigating factor in the defendant’s case is his guilty plea which was entered at the earliest opportunity.  Because of that, he is entitled to a full one-third discount to reduce the starting point of 14 years and 5 months to a final sentence of 9 years and 7 months’ imprisonment.

19.  Lastly, I consider this sentence fair, just and balanced in all the circumstances of the offence and the defendant.  Accordingly, the defendant is sentenced to imprisonment for 9 years and 7 months.

Exhibits

20.  An Order in terms of the Prosecution’s application, not objected to by the Defence, was granted to dispose the exhibits.