HKSAR v. KWAN KWOK YUK, JASON

DCCC 823/2017

[2018] HKDC 82

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 823 OF 2017

____________

____________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

1.  Kwan Kwok Yuk you have pleaded guilty to one charge of theft, contrary to section 9of the Theft Ordinance[1].

2.  Full particulars of the offence are set out in the facts admitted by you today.  In summary in 2013 you were employed as a deputy restaurant manager by a Korean restaurant “Kim’s Spoon” on the 6th Floor of Megabox in Kwun Tong.  Your duties included depositing in the bank the restaurant’s daily cash revenue which was kept in the restaurant safe.

3.  On 3 June 2015 after taking two days’ sick leave you returned to work and tendered your resignation.  You never returned to or contacted the restaurant.  Two days later Ms Wong, the restaurant manager, discovered that the daily cash revenue for the period 7 May to 30 May 2015 had not been deposited in the bank and that the cash revenue for 3 June 2015 was not in the safe.  The total amount stolen was $346,502. 

4.  The restaurant reported the matter to the police.  Over two years later on 18 July 2017 you were arrested.  Under caution you admitted stealing the daily cash revenue which you used for gambling.  

Mitigation

5.  I have carefully considered everything said on your behalf by Mr Pang together with your mitigation letter.  You cannot be given credit for a clear record having convictions for assault and theft in 2006, 2010 and 2017.  The last conviction was for stealing food from a supermarket which offence was committed on the day of your arrest. Having been arrested for shoplifting you then confessed to stealing from the restaurant.   

Guidelines

6.  By stealing the money, you breached the trust placed in you by the restaurant.  In passing sentence, I have considered the principles laid down in R v Clark[2] as applied inHKSAR v Cheung Mee Kiu[3] as adjusted in HKSAR v Ng Kwok Wing[4]. 

7.  The guidelines state the proper starting point after trial is between 2 to 3 years’ imprisonment where the amount stolen was between $250,000 to $1 million. 

8.  In determining the sentence the following matters are to be considered: (i) the quality and degree of trust reposed in the offender including his rank; (ii) the period over which the fraud or the thefts have been perpetrated; (iii) the use to which the money or property dishonestly taken was put; (iv) the effect upon the victim; (v) the impact of the offences on the public and public confidence; (vi) the effect upon fellow-employees or partners; (vii) the effect on the offender himself; (viii) his own history; and (ix) those matters of mitigation special to himself such as illness[5]. 

9.  Taking into account the degree of trust reposed in you as deputy restaurant manager responsible for banking the daily cash revenue; $346,502 was stolen over a period of twenty-five days; and that you used the money for gambling, I am satisfied the proper starting point after trial, as submitted by Mr Pang, is 2 years and 3 months’ imprisonment.

10.  Giving you full credit for your plea of guilty you are convicted and sentenced to 1 year and 6 months’ imprisonment.