Hksar v Fong King Choi

Judgment Date25 April 2019
Neutral Citation[2019] HKCA 446
Year2019
Judgement NumberCACC319/2018
Subject MatterCriminal Appeal
CourtCourt of Appeal (Hong Kong)
CACC319/2018 HKSAR v. FONG KING CHOI

CACC 319/2018

[2019] HKCA 446

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 319 OF 2018

(ON APPEAL FROM DCCC NO 90 OF 2018)

_______________

BETWEEN
HKSAR Respondent

and

FONG King-choi (方琼財) Applicant

_______________

Before: Hon Zervos JA in Court

Date of Hearing: 25 April 2019

Date of Judgment: 25 April 2019

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1. In the early morning of 30 October 2017, the applicant entered a 7-Eleven store, claiming to a female member of staff that he was collecting protection money, “tor tei”, while thumping the cashier table. He did this repeatedly when the female store manager confronted him. He demanded that she hand over to him $100 which she refused to do. He left the store shouting loudly and kicking things on the street outside. Throughout his outburst, customers were present or entering the store. He returned to the store and shouted at the manager, swearing and threatening her, saying that he would come back another time. He then took two cans of beer and knocked them down on the cashier table. As he was about to walk out of the store, the manager insisted that he pay for the beer. He put $20 on a shelf and walked out of the store shouting and swearing at the manager. The actual cost of the two cans of beer was $12.90. He remained outside the store, shouting loudly abusive comments at the manager. At one stage, he claimed he would bring his friends to the store, but the manager and her staff ignored him as he walked off and loitered outside the store.

2. The duration of this incident was from 6:19am to 6:25am, and at 6:28am he was intercepted and arrested by the police. The incident was captured on the store’s CCTV camera.

3. On 9 October 2018, the applicant pleaded guilty to the offence of blackmail in relation to this incident before District Court Judge E Yip (“the judge”). It was alleged that he made an unwarranted demand of $100 from the manager with menaces.

4. In mitigation, it was submitted on the applicant’s behalf that he was 36 years of age and residing with his parents. It was explained that he had consumed a lot of alcohol prior to the incident because he was upset with his girlfriend. It was further submitted that there was no actual violence or threat of violence, and that he acted alone without causing any damage to property. The applicant had a criminal record in relation to offences that did not include blackmail, for which he either received a probation order or a fine, although there was one occasion where he was sentenced to attend a drug addiction treatment centre for possession of a dangerous drug.

5. Counsel on the applicant’s behalf submitted HKSAR v Wong Yin Chak, CACC 126/2004, 17 December 2004, unreported, and invited the judge to adopt a starting point lower than 3 years’ imprisonment.

6. The judge noted that the applicant had only visited the store on a single day, and the incident involved a demand for a one-off payment of a small sum of money. He compared the applicant’s case with a more serious case of blackmail, Wong Yin Chak, where the Court of Appeal in the circumstances of that case regarded an overall starting point of 3 years’ imprisonment as being appropriate in relation to two offences of blackmail. In that case, the appellant together with another person made continuous demands for protection money, “tor tei”, in the sum of $1,000 from a man and later his wife who operated a newspaper stall. The first demand was made when the man was operating the stall at 3:05am. The man...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT