9 Aug 2022
香港特別行政區 訴 陳務生
- Citation
- [2022] HKCFI 2413
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA29/2022
The conviction was upheld because the trial judge's acceptance of the complainant's credible testimony, supported by CCTV movements consistent with exposure, provided sufficient evidence beyond reasonable doubt; the appellant's alternative explanation was unsupported and his silence left the prosecution evidence uncontradicted, so no error of law or fact was shown to justify interference.