Ex-employees of electronic products company get 18 months for deceiving over $160,000
2014-1-2
Two former employees of an electronic products company, charged by the ICAC, were today (Thursday) each sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment at the Kowloon City Magistracy for using false documents to deceive $166,300 from the company in relation to purchase of computers and installation of a telephone system.
Lui Lai-mei, 53, former general manager (finance) of KFE Hong Kong Company Limited (KFE); and Liu Pak-kee, 32, former administration clerk of KFE, were earlier found guilty of seven joint charges of agents using documents with intent to deceive their prin cipal, contrary to Section 9(3) of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance.
In sentencing, Magistrate Mr Ko Wai-hung said the court had to mete out jail terms to the defendants as the offences committed by them constituted a serious breach of trust.
The magistrate reprimanded the defendants for showing no remorse at all for what they had done.
The magistrate also ordered Liu to pay $166,300 as restitution to his former employer within two years.
The court heard that KFE, a subsidiary of KFE (Japan) Company Limited, was engaged in trading of electronic products. At the material time, Lui oversaw the daily operation of KFE, while Liu was her subordinate.
Upon Lui’s request in November 2010, the sole proprietor of a telephone system contractor of KFE gave some blank letterhead papers of his company to Liu.
Liu then used those blank letterhead papers to prepare a quotation and an invoice purporting to show that the telephone system contractor had supplied three computers to KFE. Upon Liu’s instruction, the proprietor also made out a receipt.
The proprietor later signed and affixed a company chop on the quotation, invoice and receipt purporting to show that his company had charged and received $23,100 from KFE for the supply of the three computers.
In fact, the proprietor had neither provided KFE with the computers nor received the $23,100. But Liu got the payment from the petty cash of KFE.
The court also heard that upon Lui’s request in March 2011, the proprietor installed a telephone system in the office of KFE.
Lui requested the proprietor to give some blank letterhead papers to Liu, who then prepared a quotation and an invoice purporting to show that the proprietor’s company charged KFE $161,800 for the project.
Upon Liu’s request, the proprietor signed and stamped on the quotation and invoice, and issued two receipts from the payment of a deposit of $80,000 and the balance of $81,800 from KFE.
In fact, the proprietor had never received the sums of $161,800, but only the payment of $18,600. Hence, the balance of $143,200 paid from petty cash of KFE was pocketed by Liu, the court was told.
The prosecution was today represented by Senior Public Prosecutor Matthew Leung, assisted by ICAC officer Calvin Wong.
Lui Lai-mei, 53, former general manager (finance) of KFE Hong Kong Company Limited (KFE); and Liu Pak-kee, 32, former administration clerk of KFE, were earlier found guilty of seven joint charges of agents using documents with intent to deceive their prin cipal, contrary to Section 9(3) of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance.
In sentencing, Magistrate Mr Ko Wai-hung said the court had to mete out jail terms to the defendants as the offences committed by them constituted a serious breach of trust.
The magistrate reprimanded the defendants for showing no remorse at all for what they had done.
The magistrate also ordered Liu to pay $166,300 as restitution to his former employer within two years.
The court heard that KFE, a subsidiary of KFE (Japan) Company Limited, was engaged in trading of electronic products. At the material time, Lui oversaw the daily operation of KFE, while Liu was her subordinate.
Upon Lui’s request in November 2010, the sole proprietor of a telephone system contractor of KFE gave some blank letterhead papers of his company to Liu.
Liu then used those blank letterhead papers to prepare a quotation and an invoice purporting to show that the telephone system contractor had supplied three computers to KFE. Upon Liu’s instruction, the proprietor also made out a receipt.
The proprietor later signed and affixed a company chop on the quotation, invoice and receipt purporting to show that his company had charged and received $23,100 from KFE for the supply of the three computers.
In fact, the proprietor had neither provided KFE with the computers nor received the $23,100. But Liu got the payment from the petty cash of KFE.
The court also heard that upon Lui’s request in March 2011, the proprietor installed a telephone system in the office of KFE.
Lui requested the proprietor to give some blank letterhead papers to Liu, who then prepared a quotation and an invoice purporting to show that the proprietor’s company charged KFE $161,800 for the project.
Upon Liu’s request, the proprietor signed and stamped on the quotation and invoice, and issued two receipts from the payment of a deposit of $80,000 and the balance of $81,800 from KFE.
In fact, the proprietor had never received the sums of $161,800, but only the payment of $18,600. Hence, the balance of $143,200 paid from petty cash of KFE was pocketed by Liu, the court was told.
The prosecution was today represented by Senior Public Prosecutor Matthew Leung, assisted by ICAC officer Calvin Wong.