- 3 - that someone else was accessing their computers. By using the Back Orific program the 2nd appellant was able to find out the login names and passwords of those users. The 2nd appellant apparently obtained 127 login names and passwords by this method. However the 2nd appellant did not use the information he gained for mere idle curiosity. He used the accounts to access the Internet between February to May 1999. The fees which the Internet Service Providers charged for such access were, in the ordinary way, charged to the accounts of the respective account holders. The 2nd appellant also passed on to the 1st appellant details of some of the login names and passwords which he had obtained. The 1st appellant knew that the 2nd appellant had obtained the account details wrongfully and that he was not entitled to use them. He paid the 1st appellant a total of HK$3,000 for this information. The 1st appellant used the account details to gain access to the Internet between February and May 1999. Naturally, again, the fees which the Internet Service Providers charged for this access were charged to the respective account holders. The 1st appellant also sold details of some of the accounts, which he obtained from the 2nd appellant, to five other people. In respect of four of those, the 1st appellant concealed from them that the details of the accounts had been obtained illegally. In all the 1st appellant made a profit of HK$1,500 by selling details of accounts which he had obtained from the 2nd appellant.