Site Logo

DPP v Jung [2022] VCC 218

The offender was sentenced following a plea of guilty to 1 count of dealing with property being $100,000 or more reasonably suspected of being proceeds of crime contrary to s 400.9(2)(c) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth). Additional offences taken into account under s 16BA.

Nature and Circumstances: Although this offence relates to sums of money between $100,000 and $1 million, it is important to avoid any crude percentage measure and to say, for example, that this is only 20% gravity of the range of such offending. The amount of money, $190,000, required serious criminal activity to generate. Amount of money and possession of an encrypted phone demonstrate the offender was placed at a level of trust and involvement higher than the lowest level of operative. Offender’s failure to advance a truthful explanation of their offending means there is nothing mitigatory in the circumstances. Offending is at the mid-range of objective seriousness.

Rehabilitation: Offender’s good character, both in South Korea and here, are taken into account and point to their very good prospects of rehabilitation. The stain of a criminal conviction, loss of reputation and shame of facing court in this way will act as a powerful deterrent to offending again.

Offender sentenced to 21 months imprisonment, to be released after 9 months on recognisance with a good behaviour bond of 21 months.
The CSD acknowledges Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as First Australians and recognises their culture, history, diversity and their deep connection to the land. We acknowledge that we are on the land of the traditional owners and pay respects to Elders past and present.

© 2023 The National Judicial College of Australia (NJCA). Powered by

Privacy Policy|Terms and Conditions