A foreign exchange dealer serving a nine-year jail term for a $194 million fraud may have been wrongly convicted, an appeal court judge says. Mr Justice Henry Litton yesterday said the guilty verdict might be unsafe and that he felt the judge who sentenced Chan Kang-to might have gone 'hopelessly wrong'. Chan, 32, was convicted in July last year of taking part in Hong Kong's biggest foreign exchange scam in which 340 investors lost their money. He is fighting for his conviction to be overturned or his sentence cut. Chan was accused of conning customers by claiming to have devised a revolutionary computer scheme which promised 50 per cent profits and limited losses to 2 per cent. He was alleged to have even cheated his parents out of their $870,000 life savings. Mr Justice Litton said he was worried the conviction on a charge of conspiracy to defraud was 'unsafe and unsatisfactory'. His concerns centred on the basis on which Chan was found guilty. The prosecution had accused him of helping mastermind a 'huge charade' in which foreign exchange company EGI International pocketed funds from customers instead of investing them. Mr Justice Litton said Chan's conviction related only to pretending the funds would be automatically traded by computer. His crime might simply have been to help business by falsely claiming to have the revolutionary system. 'On this basis . . . I would be inclined to say that the judge probably went hopelessly wrong in the sentence he passed,' Mr Justice Litton said. He said he was worried about the way in which the prosecution had put the case and the 'ambiguous' manner in which Mr Justice Terrence Ryan had left it to the jury. It could be argued the victims were deceived only to the extent that they thought investment decisions were being made by computer instead of by human judgment. The alternative was that Chan was involved in a massive deception which fooled members of his family as well as employees of the company. The appeal was adjourned until today so that Christopher Young, for Chan, can give further consideration to the case in the light of Mr Justice Litton's comments. Richard Turnball, for the Crown, has not yet had an opportunity to put forward his arguments.