HKSAR v. Wong Chun Hung
Read the full judgment text of DCCC 237/2017 on BabelCite. This District Court judgment was delivered on 23 June 2017.
1. This is a case of credit card fraud. The defendant, a 21-year-old man, made purchases at two cosmetic shops in Tsim Sha Tsui area within an hour of each other with a forged credit card which bears a name different from his.
|
DCCC 237/2017 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CRIMINAL CASE NO 237 OF 2017 ------------------------------
------------------------------
--------------------------------------- REASONS FOR SENTENCE --------------------------------------- 1.This is a case of credit card fraud. The defendant, a 21-year-old man, made purchases at two cosmetic shops in Tsim Sha Tsui area within an hour of each other with a forged credit card which bears a name different from his. 2.The defendant pleaded guilty before me to two counts of obtaining property by deception, contrary to section 17(1)(c) of the Theft Ordinance. 3.On 27 February 2016 at around 4:20 pm, the defendant went to a cosmetics shop at Carnarvon Road, Tsim Sha Tsui, where he bought some facial treatment products worth $630 with a forged credit card. Less than an hour later, he went to another cosmetics shop at Cameron Road, Tsim Sha Tsui, where he bought six bottles of massage oil worth a few hundred dollars with the same forged credit card. 4.His actions were captured by the CCTV of the shops when he made those purchases. Police later arrested him, and under caution he said he had used the forged card which was given to him to buy the items in question. 5.The defendant has five previous convictions: one theft, one possession of dangerous drugs, and the rest are all to do with violence; and in fact, he is now placed on probation for 24 months in June 2016 for an offence of AOABH. The commission of the offences in the instant case was before the probation order was made, so he is not in breach of the order. 6.The defendant was born in the Mainland, and came to Hong Kong at the age of 9, counsel said. He is the only child in the family. Lacking interest in study, the defendant left school at Form 2 to work, but could not stay long in any of the jobs he did. Places like Cyber Cafés have become a rendezvous for him and other school dropouts, Counsel said and this is how he got acquainted with dubious peers, some of them with triad background. It was in one of those Cyber Cafés the defendant was approached by a person called “Ah Hin” offering him an easy job to make quick money. As he was in need of money, he accepted the job without thinking too much about its consequences. 7.Some time after that, the defendant took part in a gang fight, as a result of which he was placed on probation, and one of the conditions is for him to be admitted to Christian Zheng Sheng College. 8.Counsel submitted five letters to the court, one from the defendant himself, one from his mother, and the rest from the college and two of his classmates. As can be gleaned from the letters, admission to the college had a profound effect on the defendant. Counsel said the defendant had committed himself to Christianity and had learned a lot about gospel teaching and discipline. He is now a reformed character. 9.Counsel stressed that the defendant only played a minor role in the crime and could better be described as a mere cog in the wheel. Counsel submitted that this is a young man who should deserve an opportunity to reform himself, and asked this court to consider a non‑custodial sentence. 10.Credit card frauds are serious offences. In Hong Pang Cheung CACC 244/2011, the Appellate Court had this to say:-
11.Here in the instant case, the card in question, bearing the name of a mainland bank, China Merchants Bank, and the name of a mainlander, Zhang Qing, is clearly not one issued by local banks, but considering the fact that the defendant had only one such card and made a few hundreds’ worth of purchase, I do not intend to increase the term by 6 months on this occasion. 12.Given the facts of the present case, I would take 3 years as starting point for each charge. 13.As far as mitigation is concerned, apart from his guilty plea, there is not anything of substance which would justify a further reduction in sentence. 14.Giving one-third discount, the 3‑year term is reduced to 2 years, and I order both terms to run concurrently with each other. 15.The total term is one of 2 years’ imprisonment.
|