HKSAR v. Chun Lai Fan, Fanny

DCCC1307/2010

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO.1307 OF 2010

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

The defendant charged with theft contrary to section 9 of the Theft Ordinance, Cap210.

The defendant pleaded guilty and admitted the facts, she is convicted accordingly.

Facts

The defendant was an accounting clerk of the victim company, which provided electrical appliances repairing services. The repairing fees collected from customers, either in cash or by cheque, would be put into a locked metal box (the “Money Box) at the office of the company.

At the material time, the defendant was usually the only person responsible for daily collection and banking of the cash and cheque, and to submit the relevant pay-in-slips to her supervisor for record on the next day.

From about 2003, the defendant started to steal cash in sum of several hundred each time, from the Money Box for about 10 to 20 times a month; and she used the repairing fees of other customer collected a few days later to cover up the shortfall. This practice led to delay in the submission of pay-in-slips to her supervisor.

As the defendant has been with the company for a long time, the delay did not give rise to suspicion. The delay progressed from a few days to several weeks by October 2009. When being asked for an explanation for the delay, the defendant made different excuses. The total amount stole by the defendant between 1 January 2004 and 30 June 2009 was HK$1,701,789.90.

On 2 November 2009, the defendant attempted suicide at home and was sent to hospital. In the hospital she admitted to the staff of the company that she had embezzled the company’s money. On 4 November 2009, she made a partial compensation in the sum of HK$220,000 to the company.

A report was made to the Police. Later under caution she admitted the theft and stated that she spent all the money on eating and playing.

The defendant made a further compensation in the sum of HK$100,000to the company on 27 November 2009.

The defendant joined the company in 1994, in 1996 she was transferred to the electrical appliance department and since 1998 she was entrusted with the collection and banking of the income put inside the Money Box. In breach of the trust, she embezzled the income of the company and stole in total of HK$1,701,789.90 in a period of 5.5 years. Seeing the matter would have been discovered by the company in due course, she attempted suicide, thereafter she confessed to the company and made compensation with the assistance of the family in total of HK$320,000 on two occasions.

I refer to the considerations stated in HKSAR v Cheung Mee Kiu CACC 99/2006,及 R v Barrick (1995) 81 Cr. App. R. 78; and the readjustment in HKSAR v Ng Kwok Wing CACC 398/2007. After taking into account the circumstances of the case, including the length of the employment and the position of the defendant, the degree of trust and the period of time and the amount involved, and the partial compensation made, I consider the appropriate starting point to be 45 months.

Mitigation

The defendant aged 38, clear record, single and lives with her elderly mother and elder brother couple. The defendant has eye problem and depression and is now receiving out-patient psychiatric treatment, and the mother is suffered from cancer. She has strong support from her family, friends, ex-colleague and supervisor. From the mitigation letters from those who love and support her, it is shown that the defendant is a responsible, sincere, enthusiastic person in all respects. The defendant adopts a positive altitude after being saved from her attempted suicide, attends out-patient psychiatric treatment, gets a part-time job at cake shop and undertakes social works.

The defendant has committed a serious offence, considerable length of imprisonment upon conviction, should have been anticipated by her, the health of the mother is something within the knowledge of the defendant, I do not consider this amount to mitigation that call for deduction. Though the health of the mother do have the court‘s sympathy.

The defendant is entitled to 1/3 discount for her plea, for her positive good character I give a 3 months reduction, and for her early indication of plea I give a further discount of 3 months, I do not consider there to be any mitigation call for further deduction.

Order

The defendant is sentenced to 24 months imprisonment.

The defendant is to receive appropriate medical and psychiatric treatment.