HKSAR v. Shum Chung Yin

HCCC 5/2025

[2026] HKCFI 5324

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 5 OF 2025

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

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

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording

of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT: The defendant was convicted by a jury of attempted murder and the particulars of the offence was that on 5 April 2024, at Kambo Game Centre in Cheung Sha Wan, Sham Shui Po, in Hong Kong, attempted to murder Chan Kam-yi.

Now the facts as disclosed were that the victim in the case was closing up shop, the game centre, when the defendant walked in and according to Madam Chan, the victim in the case, she asserted that there was not much of an interchange between them, when suddenly the defendant walked back and stabbed her.

Now the action was actually recorded on CCTV and so eventually help came and the defendant was subsequently arrested. It is according to Madam Chan was a totally unprovoked attack and all she said was the defendant had walked around the shop once and then walked to the entrance and then walked back, and that was when the incident happened.

The defendant elected to give evidence and his evidence was that he had been to a mahjong school and that he had lost money and said that he had left the mahjong school, and on the way, he saw that a store selling scissors. And so, he picked up a pair of scissors because he needed it then he proceeded to the Kambo Game Centre because he remembered he had $1,000 worth of points and wanted to exchange for money since he had lost money in gambling. And that he alleged that the lady in the game centre, told him that she could change it for him but it would cost him about $300.

And so, he then said he was willing to pay only 100 and then apparently, he said the lady swore at him which aggravated him and he then used his scissors on her. But, obviously, because of the jury’s verdict, the jury did not believe him. And so, I have to sentence him on the basis that the jury did not believe him, that it was an unprovoked attack.

However, as Mr Boyton pointed out in his mitigation, we do have the psychological report which indicated that he was a heavy gambler and that he had fragile self-esteem and was over sensitive to criticism, and so tended to be impulsive. However, as Mr Boyton correctly pointed out, he is not particularly aggressive and it shows that although the defendant has previous convictions, his last conviction was in 2007, they were all for crimes of dishonesty. This is his first crime of violence.

He lives by himself and obviously, I accept that this offence was indeed most probably triggered by his gambling problem. Mr Boyton had also submitted some very helpful cases in relation to sentencing in attempted murder. And, obviously, there is no sentencing guideline because the situations vary greatly.

And I pray in aid the case of Yip Chu Sum as Mr Boyton pointed out at paragraph 16, the Court of Appeal said that no sentencing guidelines exist because the circumstances vary, and so citation of earlier cases which do not establish any principle or guideline are frequently of limited use and that is true because as this case, I would consider, belong to the less serious category of the attempted murder cases.

It was an impulsive attack and obviously the jury believed that at the time of the attack, he had the intention at least to cause grievous bodily harm. According to the victim, there was no motive and I would accept also that according to the remarks of the psychologist that his risk of reoffending is in the low end of the moderate range.

According to the probation officer’s background report, he is addicted to gambling, he is remorseful and of course I make the observation that none of the injuries were life threatening. It is also a fact that the trial was assisted by the fact that some of the evidence were also not disputed and so, basically, not much time was wasted in the trial.

The defendant is aged 79, and the latest medical report which Mr Boyton handed up this morning, shows a very detailed report about his health. And the doctors at Queen Mary Hospital has discovered a lung mass and it is still under investigation. He probably will benefit from his incarceration for his medical condition.

So as I said it is not one of the most serious of the attempted murder cases and so, taking into account everything I have said above, I would consider a starting point of 8 years’ imprisonment to be reasonable in the circumstances. And in view of his age, I will reduce it by 1 year to 7 years’ imprisonment.