SINGAPORE: A man who wanted to transfer S$ 20, 000 ( US$ 14, 910 ) to himself via PayNow entered one of the digits of his mobile number incorrectly and sent the sum to another man instead.
When the recipient realized the amount had been received, the National Environment Agency ( NEA ) officer also saw messages from the sender promising to return the check, but he refused.
Otherwise, he withdrew the full amount that same day.
For one count of dishonest misappropriation, 59-year-old Singaporean Cho Joon Chin was fined S$ 5, 000 by a court on Wednesday ( Jul 17 ).
The victim, a 51-year-old Singaporean man by the surname Tan, requested on June 22, 2021, to transfer$ 20,000 from his DBS business profile to a different accounts linked to his mobile number.
Mr Tan’s smart range differed from Cho’s by one integer.
He falsely transferred the amount to Cho, whom he did not know, otherwise.
But, Mr. Tan sent Cho seven messages between about 2 a.m. and 10 a.m., informing him of the error and requesting that Cho send the funds up to him.
Cho did not reply. He read Mr Tan’s information but ignored them. The funds had been sent to his UOB bank accounts, so he went to a Punggol tree that day and withdrew the full amount.
The attorney claimed Cho was aware that Cho knew that the money did not belong to him, but that he had no desire to give it back or to turn it over to the authorities.
On June 24, 2021, Mr. Tan reported the incident to DBS, claiming he had requested the bank’s assistance in reversing the deal after making an incorrect PayNow exchange.
On Jul 22, 2021, DBS informed Mr Tan that their efforts to return the sum had been fruitless.
In September 2021, Mr. Tan requested a police statement.
Cho was interviewed by the authorities in November 2021. Cho claimed that he had used the funds for his own assets and that he had requested that Mr. Tan receive the funds sooner.
Cho requested more time to give Mr. Tan’s$ 14 000 and requested a limited reparation in December 2021.
But, Cho later admitted to the authorities that the funds had been a result of Mr. Chew’s sales of his Rolex watch. He claimed that PayNow had sent the income to his mobile phone number.
Cho claimed that the money was actually his property because it was really a price, and that he would not remain returning Mr. Tan’s remaining S$ 6, 000.
On December 31, 2021, Cho reported to the authorities that he had sold his Rolex watch to a Mr. Chew in an online police statement from December 31.
However, when the policeman looked into his claims, they were unable to confirm Mr. Chew’s personality or validate his sale because Cho was unable to provide any supporting evidence or supporting documentation that the Rolex had been sold.
In January of this year, Cho agreed to pay Mr. Tan the remaining amount.
The prosecutors pleaded guilty to a good, but the judge was given the decision to decide the amount.
MITIGATION
Attorney for the defense, Steven John Lam of Templars Law, requested a non-jail word for his clientele, who serves as an National agent.
He said Cho has a baby with his wife, who has end-stage cancers of several tissues.
Mr. Lam claimed that this was his first encounter with the rules and that he is paying for all the costs.
” He is contrite. It is really out of figure, and I may say this because I know the accused personally”, said Mr Lam.
He said Cho was recognised for his achievements during the COVID-19 epidemic and has made full compensation.
He asked for an instalment plan to pay any fine, saying Cho has only S$ 2, 000 on him and can only afford S$ 500 a month in payment.
” His take-home wage is about S$ 2, 200, but S$ 500 is as much as he can squeeze out a month”, said the lawyer.
For unscrupulous theft, Cho could have been jailed for up to two years, fined, or both.