CDirector of Public Prosecutions v Huang
[2025] VCC 1210
•22 August 2025
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE CRIMINAL DIVISION | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
Case No. 25-00557
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (CTH) |
| v |
| ZIPENG HUANG |
---
JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE HASSAN | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 15 August 2025 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 22 August 2025 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | CDPP v HUANG | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2025] VCC 1210 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:CRIMINAL LAW
Catchwords: Sentence — one charge of attempting to export a regulated native species; four charges of attempting to export CITES specimens - one summary charge of failing to record the acquisition of a Centralian blue tongue lizard; four summary charges of breaching a condition of wildlife licence; four summary charges of failing to house wildlife as required by Wildlife Regulations; one charge of failing to submit annual returns as required by wildlife licence — plea of guilty — specimens had limited access to oxygen, no access to food, water and light – estimated total value of the specimens of about $137,311 – conduct involving preparation and planning – accused on a bridging visa – accused suffering of a major depressive disorder and generalised anxiety disorder – risk of deportation to China – good prospect of rehabilitation and low risk of reoffending.
Legislation Cited: Criminal Code 1995 (Cth); Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth); Migration Act 1958 (Cth); Crimes Act 1914 (Vic); Wildlife Regulations 2013 (Vic); Wildlife Regulations 2024 (Vic).
Cases Cited:CDPP v NG [2023] VCC 2200; Morgan v R [2007] NSWCCA 8; R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269; R v Chibana [2019] VCC 1286; R v Kennedy (2019) 101 NSWLR 121; R v Pogmore [2020] NSWDC 883; Qiu v R [2022] NSWCCA 247; R v Man Lung Ma [2024] NSWDC 573.
Sentence: Total effective sentence of 2 years and 10 months’ imprisonment and 12 months' imprisonment before being released on a recognisance order in the amount of $1,000 to be of good behaviour for two years.
Summary charges: aggregate fine of $5,000.00.
Section 6AAA declaration: 4 years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of 2 years and 6 months.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions | Mr M. Keks | Solicitor for Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions |
For the Accused For DEECA | Mr L. Carter Ms L Krumins and Ms R. Waters | Nicodemus Lawyers |
HER HONOUR:
Introduction
Zipeng Huang, you have pleaded guilty to 1 charge of attempting to export a regulated native species contrary to s 303DD (1) of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth)[1] and s 11.1 (1) of the Criminal Code (Cth)[2] and 4 charges of attempting to export CITES (that is the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna) specimens contrary to s 303CC (1) of the Environment Protection and Diversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth)[3] and s 11.1 (1) of the Criminal Code,[4] all these charges carry a 10-year maximum penalty.
[1] Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) s 303DD(1).
[2] Criminal Code (Cth) s 11.1 (1).
[3] Environment Protection and Diversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) s 303CC (1).
[4] Note 2.
You have also pleaded guilty to the following summary charges: 1 charge of failing to record the acquisition of a Centralian blue tongue lizard (summary Charge 1) which carries a maximum penalty of 20 penalty units, 4 charges of breaching a condition of your wildlife licence (summary Charges 2, 3, 8 and 14) and these charges carry a maximum penalty of 100 penalty units, 4 charges of failing to house wildlife as required by Wildlife Regulations[5] (summary charges 20, 21, 25 and 28) for which there is a maximum penalty of 50 penalty units, 1 charge of failing to submit you annual returns as required by your wildlife licence (summary Charge 33) for which there is a maximum penalty of 20 penalty units, and 1 charge of importing lizards from interstate without a permit for which there is a maximum penalty of 100 penalty units.
[5] Wildlife Regulations 2024 (Vic).
I begin with a summary of the indictable matters.
You were the holder of a Victoria State Wildlife Licence which permitted you to possess, keep, breed, display, buy, sell and dispose of wildlife listed in schedules 2 and 17 of the Wildlife Regulations 2013 (Vic)[6] for non‑commercial purposes.
[6] Wildlife Regulations 2013 (Vic).
On five occasions between 19 May 2022 and 12 July 2024 you lodged a total of nine consignments at post-offices. The consignments were bound for China. The nine consignments contained a total of 27 specimens comprising of 2 lace monitors, 3 blotched blue tongue lizards, 6 Western blue tongue lizards, 7 shingle back lizards and 9 common blue tongue lizards.
All the specimens are regulated native specimens which require a permit to be exported, which you did not hold. On the final four occasions the consignments contained species which were CITES specimens, which are species the trade in which requires strict regulation in order to ensure their ongoing survival.
You lodged consignment one, two and three on 19 May 2022 at the Docklands post office. Each consignment bore a false identity and signature of the sender. They were addressed to a recipient in Hong Kong.
The customs declaration stated the consignments contained music box toys.
On 23 May 2022 consignment one was examined by Department of Energy, Environment Climate Action and Agriculture ('DCCEEW') officers and was found to contain 3 live shingle back lizards secreted in tied socks inside Pringles containers.
10. On 24 May 2022 officers examined consignments two and three and found each to contain 2 live shingleback lizards packaged in the same way.
11. The 7 lizards had restricted access to oxygen, and no access to food, water and light.
12. On 12 June 2024 you lodged a fourth consignment consisting of one parcel at the Syndal post office addressed to a recipient in Hong Kong. You used a false identity and signature. The customs declaration stated that the consignment contained toy music boxes.
13. The consignment was examined by officers on 14 June 2024 and was found to contain a blue tongue lizard secreted in tied socks inside a Pringle container wrapped inside another sock. The lizard had restricted access to oxygen and no access to food, water or light.
14. The fifth consignment was lodged by you at the Mount Waverly post office on 1 July 2024. Again, it was addressed to a recipient in Hong Kong, you used a false name and signature and this time you declared the consignment contained work shoes.
15. Officers examined the consignment on 4 July 2024 and found it contained 1 common blue tongued lizard and 1 live Western blue tongued lizard. The lizards were concealed in socks inside work-boots. The lizards had restricted access to oxygen and no access to food, water or light.
16. The sixth consignment was lodged by you at the Syndal post office on 2 July 2024. It was addressed to a recipient in Hong Kong. You used a false identity and signature. You declared the consignment contained work shoes.
17. Upon examination on 4 July 2024 the consignment was found to contain two common blue tongue lizards secreted in socks inside Pringle containers which were wrapped in another sock. The lizards had restricted access to oxygen and no access to food, water or light.
18. The seventh, eighth and ninth consignments were lodged by you at two separate news agencies in Brisbane. These consignments were addressed to a recipient in Hong Kong, and you used a false identity and signature. The customs declaration stated that the consignments contained work boots.
19. The three consignments were examined on 15 July 2024.
20. The seventh consignment contained 1 deceased Western blue tongue lizard, 1 live blotched blue tongue lizard and 2 common blue-tongue lizards
21. The eighth consignment contained 2 blotched blue-tongue lizards, and 3 common blue tongue lizards.
22. The ninth consignment contained 2 Western blue tongue lizards, 2 deceased Western blue tongue lizards and 2 lace monitors.
23. In each of these consignments the lizards were secreted in socks inside work boots. All the lizards had restricted access to oxygen and no access to food, water or light.
24. Your residence was searched under warrant on 1 August 2024. Australia Post receipts were found for consignments the subject of Charges 2 and 4. Photographed receipts were found for all other consignments on your mobile phone.
25. You were in possession of captive wildlife specimens, including lizards. There were items located by investigators which you used in your illegal enterprise including mailing boxes, Pringle containers, socks, boots and zip ties.
26. You were arrested and made a no comment record of interview.
27. In terms of your role in the offending, the investigation into your activities disclosed that you communicated on the 'WeChat' application using two chatrooms between 18 April 2023 and 31 July 2024. You communicated with two unknown individuals in Hong Kong. You communicated using code words to refer to the specimens. You received directions from Hong Kong about the specimens to be purchased and where they were to be sent. You were funded from Hong Kong to cover the purchase of specimens and the costs incurred in sending them. You recommended locations and mailing services in Australia which were, in your view, the most likely to succeed in exporting native specimens avoiding detection. You suggested the best type of packaging in which to export native specimens undetected. You made enquiries about the acquisition of two fraudulent pieces of identification, and you monitored the receipt of money from Hong Kong, ensuring there was always sufficient money to cover your expenses.
28. Turning to the summary charges.
29. You were the holder of a private wildlife licence, and you were issued a record book in which you were required to record transactions.
30. On 5 July 2024 authorised officers determined that you had purchased from a wildlife dealer in Springvale, 1Centralian blue tongue lizard on 13 March 2024, and 2shingle back lizards, 2 Western blue tongue lizards and 1sand monitor on 20 June 2024.
31. When your premises were searched under warrant on 1 August 2024 you had not recorded these acquisitions in your record book as you were required to as a licence holder. Further, you told officers that you had on sold the lizards and these transactions were not recorded as is required under your licence. (summary Charges 1, 2, 8 and 14).
32. You were in possession of the following wildlife: 1 children's python, 1 shingle back lizard and 1 blue tongue lizard housed together in a rabbit or guinea pig style cage, 3 blue lizards housed singly in plastic tubes in a racking system located in an undercover deck area outside, and 1 gidgee skink in the living room in a glass enclosure.
33. Your housing of the various lizards was in breach of provisions of the code of practice for the private keeping of reptiles which requires reptiles be housed in impervious cages for hygiene and welfare reasons (summary Charge 20), and that the enclosure has a UV light fitted. (summary Charge 21). One of the shingleback lizards had an untreated, deformed left limb. You voluntarily surrendered the lizard, but it had to be euthanised upon veterinary advice.
34. Additionally, the 3 blue tongue lizards had no drinking water (summary Charge 25) and no form of shelter or hide to meet their environmental needs. (summary Charge 28).
35. You were found to have failed to submit your annual returns as required by your licence. (summary Charge 33).
36. On 18 September 2024, analysis of your devices disclosed that you had imported wildlife into Victoria on 3occasions without an import permit. On 20 December 2023 you imported 5 blue tongue lizards from New South Wales. On 23 June 2024 you imported 9 blue tongue lizards from Queensland, and on 4 July 2024 you imported 5 gidgee skinks and 2 Western blue tongue lizards from South Australian. (summary Charge 34).
37. You declined to participate in an interview in respect of these charges.
38. Turning now to the matters to which I am required to give consideration, and which were raised with me at your plea.
39. I begin with the objective gravity of your offending.
40. The objective of the regulation of the international movement of wildlife is to protect vulnerable species and the plunder of Australia's natural heritage. As was observed in the second reading speech on the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act[7] the trade in illegal wildlife is horrific and has driven species to the brink. It was further observed that it is not only well-known species such as the black rhino and elephants that are at risk, but many lesser-known Australian species are at risk.
[7] Commonwealth, Parliamentary Debates, Senate, 24 May 2001, 24269 (Ian Campbell, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts).
41. In the opening the prosecution set out a table of the mean price on the international market of the specimens you attempted to exported. They range from around $964 for a common blue tongue lizard to over $7,000 for lace monitors. All the specimens trade at only around $200-$600 domestically. It is estimated by the prosecution, and this was not put into dispute, that you attempted to trade in specimens to a total value of about $137,311.
42. It is a pernicious trade characterised by cruelty and greed. It is notoriously difficult to detect, and the authorities make it clear it warrants stern punishment and would normally attract a full-time custodial sentence.
43. The relevant factors to consider in the assessment of the objective seriousness of an offence include.
(a) the nature and extent of an offender's role;
(b) the offender's motivation in committing the offence;
(c) the level of sophistication of the enterprise in which the offender was involved;
(d) whether the offender's conduct revealed any particular aggravating features such as undue cruelty;
(e) the number, value and/or rarity of the specimens involved;
(f) the actual and/or potential harm occasioned to the particular specimens; and
(g) the actual and/or potential harm or damage occasioned to the environment including for example the spread of disease.
44. Applying these considerations to your behaviour.
45. You played a vital onshore role in the sourcing and supply of the lizards to the Hong Kong market. Your conduct involved preparation and planning, including packaging the lizards in the mail, and obtaining and using false identities to avoid detection. The heads of the enterprise may have been based in Hong Kong but without your involvement here in Australia the enterprise would simply not have been viable.
46. You involved yourself for money. Your motivation was greed. As will be discussed in more detail when I turn to your personal circumstances, although you were experiencing some financial stress you were not without the means to adequately support yourself. Indeed, you had received generous support from your parents on two occasions to start businesses.
47. Your offending involved some sophistication. You had established a commercial exportation business at your home. You had a system of packaging the lizards and avoiding detection by attending different post offices and concealing your identity and the contents of the packages.
48. Your offending was cruel. You packaged the lizards in restrictive conditions with limited access to oxygen and no access to food and water. The lizards were all at risk of death having been posted like inanimate objects rather than being treated as sentient beings. You were clearly prepared to risk that some of the lizards may be harmed and die, and this was a risk you were prepared to take to make money.
49. Three of the lizards in fact died.
50. The trade threatens Australia’s wildlife and Charges 2–5 concerned CITES listed species.
51. The five charges encompass nine consignments and involved 27 specimens. I accept the prosecution submission that your offending appeared to be escalating and only stopped upon your arrest.
52. Your moral culpability is high. You held a Victoria Wildlife Licence, and you knew what you were doing was unlawful.
53. In respect of the summary charges, I accept the prosecution submission that your offending is not to be trivialised as mere regulatory breaches or paperwork omissions. Rather, the entire system of wildlife protection starts from proper compliance with regulatory requirements, and their enforcement is a critical condition of animal welfare and the prevention of harvesting animals from the wild.
54. Turning to your personal circumstances.
55. You were born on 24 November 1997 in China. You are presently 27 years old.
56. You have no relevant prior criminal history.
57. You came to Australia when you were 19 years old in 2017 to pursue educational and vocational opportunities. Your parents remain in China and both are retired. You have a sister who also lives in China and is a teacher.
58. You came to Australia on a student visa. You are currently on a bridging visa. You have a domestic partner Ms Jie Mei, who was born in Australia. You have a registered defacto relationship and were intending to marry.
59. You obtained a Diploma of Commerce from Monash University and Bachelor of Business Administration, Finance and Economics, also from Monash University. You graduated in 2021.
60. You have established two businesses here in Melbourne.
61. In July 2022 you registered a bubble tea shop. You are the director and secretary of the company and hold 55 of the business' 100 shares. Your parents gave you $40,00 to invest in this business. You report it has not been successful and given the uncertainty of your situation you do not intend to renew the business' lease when it comes up for renewal in October 2025.
62. In August 2022 you registered a Japanese restaurant. You are the director and secretary of the company and hold 70 of the business' 100 shares. Your parents gave you $70,000 to invest in the business. You learned to cook and worked as the chef in the restaurant. You report you were earning $20,00 per annum from the business. You continued working at the restaurant until January 2025 when again, given the uncertainty of your situation you decided it would be preferable if you withdrew your involvement.
63. Since January 2025, you have supported yourself doing manual jobs such as cleaning.
64. You told your parents in January 2025 that you were facing criminal charges and were at risk of imprisonment and deportation. Your parents were understandably very distressed, your mother became unwell and required a period of hospitalisation.
65. Ms Mei is also understandably highly distressed. It was your intention to marry and settle here in Australia. The future of your relationship is now in doubt.
66. A number of character references were tendered at your plea including from your parents and Ms Mei, and from your friends here in Australia. All describe you as an honest and hardworking man. Your parents say that you treated animals compassionately in your youth. All say you are ashamed and deeply remorseful.
67. You have written a letter addressed to the Court, in which you say you are experiencing a deep sense of shame and embarrassment. You say candidly and to your credit, 'Reflecting upon my actions, I must admit I did not commit the crime due to financial hardship, but rather out of selfish desires and the gambler's mentality that I won't be caught, hoping to earn quick money through my own interest and hobby. As a person who claims to love animals, I repeatedly ignore [sic] the health and safety of those lizards and the miserable fate they may face after being illegally traded'.
68. Since being arrested and charged you have become anxious and depressed. You were referred by your doctor to Dr Ming Tam, clinical and forensic psychologist in August 2024.
69. Dr Tam wrote a report dated 15 July 2025 which was tendered at your plea.
70. You attended 17 weekly to monthly 60-minute sessions with Dr Tam between August 2024 and July 2025.
71. Dr Tam gives the opinion that at the time of your offending you were experiencing a number of stressors including the death of your grandfather and your grandmother's diagnosis of dementia, and financial pressure attributable to your businesses and your upcoming wedding. In Chinese culture it is the groom who bears most of the cost of the wedding and is expected to provide a family home. You felt guilt that your parents had supported you and you were failing to live up to their expectations. Dr Tam says you reported symptoms consistent with an adjustment disorder.
72. Dr Tam gives the opinion that you currently meet the criteria for a diagnosis of a major depressive disorder and generalised anxiety disorder.
73. Dr Tam gives the opinion your symptoms would worsen in a custodial environment where it is unlikely that you would be able to access culturally and linguistically appropriate psychological services. You would be unlikely to secure a Cantonese interpreter for regular psychological sessions in prison.
74. You were seen by Jeffrey Cummins, Consulting Clinical and Forensic Psychologist on 22 July 2025. Mr Cummins wrote a report dated 5 August 2025 which was tendered at your plea.
75. Mr Cummins assessed your offending to be situational and assessed your risk of reoffending as low to negligible. Mr Cummins reviewed Dr Tam's report and agreed with his conclusion that you offended in the context of a trauma, stressor related disorder triggered by short term pressures. He gives the opinion that you now meet the diagnosis of a first episode of a Major Depressive disorder. He gives the opinion that your mental health would deteriorate in custody to a substantial degree.
76. The following matters in mitigation were raised on your behalf by your counsel at your plea.
77. First your plea of guilty. Your plea of guilty is an early plea and although made in the face of a strong prosecution case it still carries significant utilitarian value, and you are therefore entitled to an appropriate mitigatory discount.
78. Your counsel further submitted that you have demonstrated contrition for your offending. I accept this submission. I accept that over and above your plea of guilty you have consistently and genuinely expressed your remorse for your actions, including in your letter to the Court. I further accept that you have since your arrest been prepared to cooperate with authorities. You gave a 'no comment' records of interview but I accept that this was due to language difficulties.
79. You also made an offer to assist the prosecution. I am told that this offer was rejected as having low evidentiary value, and what you were prepared to say about your own role was not regarded as credible. Nevertheless, I take into account and give some modest weight to your offer in my assessment of your remorse.
80. You are at risk of deportation. You have made a life here in Australia and you plan to marry your Australian partner. This is now in jeopardy. The prospect of deportation is therefore of real significance in your case and even though you do have family to return to in China. The prospect of deportation constitutes a form of extra-curial punishment, and any time in custody will be more burdensome given your anxiety over your future.
81. Although the prospect that you will be deported carries real weight in the sentencing discretion it does not permit me to craft a sentence to avoid the operation of the Migration Act.[8]
[8] Migration Act 1958 (Cth).
82. Turning to Verdins[9] submissions made on your behalf. It was submitted that Verdins[10] limbs 1,2, 3, 5 and 6 were applicable in your case.
[9] R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269.
[10] Ibid.
83. I made it clear to your counsel at your plea that I reject any opinion given by either Dr Tam or Mr Cummins that your offending is in any way attributable or explained by a mental health condition such that it reduces your moral culpability. Your offending was indisputably motivated by a desire to make what you yourself described as easy money. You set up a sophisticated wildlife export business to achieve your objective and only desisted upon arrest. Engaging in criminal conduct is always a poor decision but your offending was purposeful and calculated,
84. I reject there is any application of Verdins[11] limb 1. I also reject any submission that you are not a suitable vehicle for general deterrence, or that there is anything contained in the reports of Dr Tam or Mr Cummins that suggests that this sentencing principle should be moderated in your case.
[11] Note 9.
85. What I do accept is that since your arrest you have become highly depressed and anxious and any time in custody will be more burdensome because of this. I also accept that given your poor English and your reliance on a Cantonese interpreter you will find it difficult to be treated in custody and there is a significant risk that your mental health will worsen.
86. Prison will be a very difficult place for you for a number of reasons: the prospect of deportation, your poor mental health, your youth, English not being your first language, and that you are a person otherwise of good character and pro-social values and prison life will be a shock to you.
87. You are still a young person. You have a supportive family. You are deeply ashamed of your conduct. I assess your prospects of rehabilitation as very good and your likelihood to re-offend as low.
88. I was referred to comparator cases by both parties in order to assist me understanding the relevant sentencing principles and to give some indication of current sentencing practices. These have been of assistance to me in formulating an appropriate sentence for you.[12]
[12] CDPP v NG [2023] VCC 2200; Morgan v R [2007] NSWCCA 8; R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 269; R v Chibana [2019] VCC 1286; R v Kennedy (2019) 101 NSWLR 121; R v Pogmore [2020] NSWDC 883; Qiu v R [2022] NSWCCA 247; R v Man Lung Ma [2024] NSWDC 573.
89. Section 17A of the Crimes Act[13] imposes an obligation on the court to only pass a sentence of imprisonment after having considered all other available sentences and decided none of those alternative sentences are appropriate in all the circumstances of the case.
[13] Crimes Act 1914 (Vic) s 17A.
90. There was no dispute that given the seriousness of your offending a term of imprisonment was required. Defence however submitted that given your relatively young age, your lack of relevant prior convictions, your good prospects of rehabilitation and for the reasons already canvassed in these reasons that the experience of custody will be very difficult for you, I should order your immediate release.
91. The prosecution submitted that you should serve a term of imprisonment consisting of a head sentence and a non-parole period.
92. Mr Huang, you have involved yourself in the illicit trade of wildlife exportation – a trade which is both cruel and inhumane and which poses a threat to this country's biodiversity. As His Honour District Court Judge Buscombe observed in the case of Pogmore[14] this is something in which the third decade of the 21st century we should all be very concerned with.
[14] R v Pogmore [2020] NSWDC 883 at [41].
93. General deterrence is the predominant sentencing principle. That is, the sentence I impose must send the message to others who would behave as you did that this type of offending will not be tolerated and will be punished. You must be adequately punished and the sentence I impose must denounce your conduct on behalf of the community who want this trade stopped and Australia's wildlife protected from exploitation.
94. Your offending was of some duration and only stopped upon detection, there is therefore some application of the sentencing principle of specific deterrence, that is the sentence I impose must get the message through to you that you must never behave in this way again.
95. Taking into account all the matters that I am required to under s 16(A)(2) of the Crimes Act (Cth).[15] I intend to sentence you as follows. It is time for you to stand up now please, Mr Huang.
[15] Crimes Act (Cth) s 16(A)(2).
96. On the summary charges you are convicted and sentenced to an aggregate fine of $5,000.00
97. You are convicted on all indictable charges.
98. On Charge 1 you are sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment.
99. On Charge 2 you are sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment
On Charge 3 you are sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment.
On Charge 4 you are sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment.
On Charge 5 you are sentenced to 2 years' imprisonment.
I direct that 4 months of the sentence on Charge 1 and 2 months of the sentences on Charges 2, 3 and 4 be served cumulatively upon Charge 5 and upon each other.
That makes a total effective sentence of 2 years and 10 months' imprisonment. I direct you must serve 12 months' imprisonment before being released on a recognisance order in the amount of $1,000 to be of good behaviour for 2 years.
The start dates are as follows.
Charge 5, which is the base charge, commences today 22 August 2025.
Charge 1 commences on 22 December 2026.
Charge 2 commences on 22 February 2027.
Charge 3 commences on 22 April 2027.
Charge 4 commences on 22 June 2027.
I declare that you have served nil pre sentence detention.
But for your plea of guilty I would have sentenced you to 4 years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of 2 years and 6 months.
I make the forfeiture order which was not opposed.
- - -
0
10
0