HKSAR v. Fung Chun Ho

DCCC 549/2025

[2026] HKDC 927

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 549 OF 2025

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

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

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

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

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

1.The defendant is charged with 7 charges:

(a) 3 charges of theft, contrary to section 9 of Theft Ordinance, Cap 210 (Charges 1 to 3);

(b) 2 charges of forgery of documents, contrary to section 111(1)(a) of the Road Traffic Ordinance, Cap 374 (Charges 4 and 7);

(c) a charge of driving without a valid driving licence, contrary to section 42(1) and (4) of the Road Traffic Ordinance, Cap 374 (Charge 5); and

(d) a charge of using a motor vehicle without third party insurance, contrary to section 4(1) and (2)(a) of the Motor Vehicles Insurance (Third Party Risks) Ordinance, Cap 272 (Charge 6).

2.He is convicted of these charges on his own plea and agreement to Amended Summary of Facts.

Facts

3.On 14 October 2024, PW1 found his motorcycle bearing registration mark XB179 (“V1”) missing.  V1 was worth HK$25,037.  The case was reported.

4.On 21 October 2024, PW2 found his motorcycle bearing registration mark WY1460 (“V2”) missing.  V2 was worth HK$15,000.  The case was reported.

5.On 23 October 2024, police officers found the parked V2 affixed with a number plate bearing registration mark VH5116 and the vehicle licence of V1.  A metal oil can was found on V2, and the fingerprint found on the same matched with that of the defendant.

6.PW3 owned a motorcycle bearing registration mark TV449 (“V3”).  On 28 October 2024, PW3 found V3’s number plate and vehicle licence missing.  The number plate was worth HK$100.  The case was reported.

7.PW4 owned a motorcycle bearing registration mark VH5116.  The number plate was never lost and PW4 had never lent it to anyone.  Upon being informed by the police that the same registration mark was used on another motorcycle, PW4 deregistered VH5116 with the Transport Department on 8 November 2024.

8.On 12 November 2024, the defendant was seen riding V1 bearing registration mark VH5116 with the vehicle licence of V3 affixed. 

9.The defendant never held a motorcycle driving licence, and his private car and light goods vehicle licence expired on 22 August 2022.

10.The defendant was charged with the following offences:

(a) stealing V1 (Charge 1);

(b) stealing V2 (Charge 2);

(c) stealing V3’s number plate and vehicle licence (Charge 3);

(d) using the number plate VH5116 and V1’s vehicle licence on V2 with an intent to deceive (Charge 4);

(e) driving V1 without a valid driving licence (Charge 5);

(f) driving V1 without third party risk insurance (Charge 6); and

(g) using the number plate VH5116 and V3’s vehicle licence on V1 with an intent to deceive (Charge 7).

Criminal Record

11.The defendant has 17 criminal records involving convictions of 37 charges, 11 of which are theft/attempted theft, similar to Charges 1 to 3; 4 of which are similar to Charges 4 and 7; 3 of which are similar to Charge 5; and 3 of which are similar to Charge 6.

Mitigation

12.The defendant is now aged 48.  He is educated up to Form 2 level.  Before the incident, he worked as a cleaner on a casual basis, earning approximately HK$15,000 per month.  He is single and lives in a public housing estate.

13.Defence counsel referred this court to the cases of HKSAR v Cheung Ka On[1]; HKSAR vWong Kam Ho[2]; HKSAR v So Pak Lun[3]; 香港特別行政區訴王振庭[4]; 香港特別行政區訴黃啟源[5]; 香港特別行政區訴李志峰[6] and 香港特別行政區訴陳梓俊[7].

14.Defence counsel submitted that in the present case, the stolen motorcycles V1 and V2 were worth HK$25,037 and HK$15,000 respectively and the stolen number plate was worth HK$100.  V1 and V2 were recovered and there is no evidence that there was any damage to the vehicles.  Since the dates of the offences happened within a month and they were closely connected to each other, he asked this court to consider the totality principle in sentencing.  He also submitted that by reason of the defendant’s timely plea, he should be entitled to full one-third sentencing discount.

15.Defence counsel also conceded that the defendant’s similar convictions in the past posed as an aggravating feature in sentencing.

Discussion

16.Before sentencing, this court has carefully considered all that was said by defence counsel on behalf of the defendant as well as the authorities in the area.

17.For Charges 1 to 3, any person convicted of this charge upon indictment is liable to imprisonment for 10 years.

Charges 1 and 2 - Theft of a motorcycle

18.For each charge, the defendant has stolen a motorcycle parked in a street.  They were worth HK$25,037 and HK$15,000 respectively.  They were later recovered and, as defence counsel submitted, there is no evidence of damage caused to any of these vehicles.

19.After considering the authorities cited, the court considered that 2 years and 6 months would be the appropriate sentencing starting point for both Charge 1 and Charge 2.

20.The defendant was convicted on 28 October 2022 in DCCC 328 & 617/2022 for stealing four motorcycles and attempting to steal the fifth motor vehicle.  He was sentenced to a total of 2 years and 10 months’ imprisonment in those two cases.

21.He committed the present offences on two days in October 2024, shortly after his release from prison for similar offences.  Sentence passed on the defendant on the previous occasions obviously was incapable or inadequate to deter the defendant from repeat offending.  For this reason, the court will enhance the sentencing starting point by 3 months to 2 years and 9 months’ imprisonment.

22.The defendant has pleaded guilty and is therefore entitled to full one-third sentencing discount.  He is sentenced to 22 months’ imprisonment for each of Charge 1 and Charge 2.

Charge 3 - Theft of a number plate and a vehicle licence

23.There is no sentencing guideline for theft of a number plate and vehicle licence.  The number plate in question was worth HK$100.

24.The appropriate sentencing starting point is 3 months’ imprisonment.  The defendant is therefore sentenced to 2 months’ imprisonment after plea for this charge.

Charges 4 and 7 - Forgery of documents

25.A person convicted of this offence is liable to a fine of level 3 and to imprisonment for 3 years.

26.For Charge 4, at the time the offence was discovered, the motorcycle affixed with the number plate of another vehicle and the vehicle licence of another vehicle was stationary.

27.This court considers that the appropriate sentencing starting point is 6 months’ imprisonment.  The defendant is therefore sentenced to 4 months’ imprisonment after plea for Charge 4.

28.For Charge 7, at the time the offence was discovered, the defendant was actually riding on the motorcycle.  This court considers the offence is more serious than that of Charge 4.  Should there be any contravention of traffic regulations or any accident arising from the riding of such motorcycle, it would surely land the owner of VH5116 in trouble.

29.For this reason, the appropriate sentencing starting point is 9 months’ imprisonment.  The defendant is therefore sentenced to 6 months’ imprisonment after plea for Charge 7.

Charge 5- Driving without a valid driving licence

30.A person convicted of this offence is liable to a fine at level 3 and to imprisonment for 6 months on a second or subsequent conviction.

31.This is the defendant’s fourth conviction of this offence.  Appropriate sentencing starting point is 3 months’ imprisonment.  The defendant is therefore sentenced to 2 months’ imprisonment after plea.

Charge 6 - Using a motor vehicle without third party insurance

32.A person convicted of this offence is liable to a fine of at level 3 and to imprisonment for 12 months.

33.This is the fourth conviction of the defendant.  The commission of this offence posed risks to other road users and properties around.  The court considers that the appropriate sentencing starting point is 9 months’ imprisonment.

34.Again, the defendant is afforded one-third sentencing discount by reason of his guilty plea.  He is therefore sentenced to 6 months’ imprisonment for this charge.

35.On conviction of this charge, the court shall, unless for special reason thinks fit to order otherwise, order the defendant to be disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence of a vehicle for such a period as the court may determine being not less than 12 months nor more than 3 years from the date of conviction

36.This court sees no special reason in this case and therefore the court now orders the defendant be disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence of any class for 30 months from today.

Totality

37.Although Charge 1 and Charge 2 offences are similar in nature, they were committed within a time interval of not less than 6 days apart.  These are separate incidents, unconnected.

38.Charge 3 involved a number plate TV449 which does not belong to PW1 or PW2, obviously, it relates to yet another motorcycle.  The offence was therefore not connected to Charge 1 or Charge 2.

39.Charge 4 involved the use of a number plate of yet another motorcycle, i.e. the fourth vehicle, VH5116, and the vehicle licence of V1.

40.Charge 5, 6 and 7 were all connected.  They were committed on the same day and they arose out of the same incident, i.e. the defendant’s driving without a valid driving licence of a vehicle bearing number plate and vehicle licence belonging to different vehicles and without third party risk insurance.

41.Considering the totality principle and the overall culpability of the defendant in the whole case, the court now orders that 5 months of sentence for Charge 2 is to run consecutive to the sentence for Charge 1.  Sentence for Charge 3 and 2 months of sentence for Charge 4 is to run consecutive to the sentence for the first two charges.  Sentences for Charges 5, 6 and 7 are to run totally concurrent with each other and to run consecutive to the sentence for the other charges.

42.The total sentence for the defendant is therefore 37 months’ imprisonment in this case.