香港特別行政區 訴 馮建雄

香港特別行政區 訴 馮建雄

Admissions and computer logs were admissible and established that the appellant intentionally elevated his account, reset other users' passwords and used multiple accounts to access and download targeted proposals; the psychiatric evidence did not establish lack of dishonest intent or incapacity to foresee consequences; the RGC system and its server constituted a "computer" under s161 and "gain" encompassed the information obtained; therefore appellant possessed the requisite dishonest purpose under s161(1)(c) and convictions are upheld.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 504
Parties
Respondent (prosecution): 香港特別行政區; Appellant (defendant): 馮建雄
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
15 February 2024
Case Number
HCMA358/2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Final Judgment on Appeal (high Court)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; convictions and original sentencing affirmed
Legal Topics
Unauthorized Access to Computer, Dishonest Intent Under S161(1)(c), Definition of Gain, Admissibility of Computer Records (s22 A), Expert Psychiatric Evidence and Weight, Application of Ghosh Test
Source Language
CH
Criminal Law Computer Crime Evidence Forensic Computing Medical/psychiatric Evidence Unauthorized Access to Computer Dishonest Intent Under S161(1)(c) Definition of Gain +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

香港特別行政區

Respondent (prosecution)

馮建雄

Appellant (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Final Judgment on Appeal (high Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellant had the requisite dishonest intent/purpose to obtain gain under s161(1)(c)
  2. 2 Whether admissions and cautioned statements were voluntary and admissible
  3. 3 Whether computer printouts and system logs met evidential admissibility under Evidence Ordinance s22A

Ratio Decidendi

Admissions and computer logs were admissible and established that the appellant intentionally elevated his account, reset other users' passwords and used multiple accounts to access and download targeted proposals; the psychiatric evidence did not establish lack of dishonest intent or incapacity to foresee consequences; the RGC system and its server constituted a "computer" under s161 and "gain" encompassed the information obtained; therefore appellant possessed the requisite dishonest purpose under s161(1)(c) and convictions are upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; convictions and original sentencing affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Convictions for four counts under s161(1)(c) upheld