1. During franchisee recruitment, Jun Rong (transliteration) Foods Co., Ltd. did not fully disclose to trading counterparts in writing important franchise information, such as products and raw material purchase expenses or estimated costs. It was obviously an unfair conduct affecting trading order in the franchise market and in violation of Article 25 of the Fair Trade Act. In addition to ordering the company to immediately cease the unlawful act, the FTC imposed on it an administrative fine of NT$200,000.
2. When recruiting franchisees, Wu Hang (transliteration) Communications Co., Ltd. did not fully disclose to trading counterparts in writing important franchise information, including the scheduled planning of the number setting up in the same area, the number and locations of franchisees in all the counties (cities), the ratios of contract cancellation or termination in the preceding year and the minimum amounts of products to be sold during the contract period. The conduct was obviously unfair affecting trading order in the franchise market and also in violation of Article 25 of the Fair Trade Act. Besides ordering the company to immediately cease the unlawful act, the FTC imposed on it an administrative fine of NT$150,000.
3. Taichung Security Commercial Union achieved a resolution to restrict the security companies to give quotations for their security services during a general member assembly. The practice restrained the business activities of the members and also had an effect on the supply-demand function of the relevant market in violation of Article 15 (1) of the Fair Trade Act. In addition to ordering the union to immediately cease the unlawful act and revise the related provisions in the “Fundamental Guidelines for Security Companies” within six months, the FTC imposed on it an administrative fine of NT$200,000.
4. Alterna Taiwan violated Article 19 (1) of the Fair Trade Act by restraining beauty salons price setting for the company’s Moroccanoil series. In addition to ordering the company to immediately cease the unlawful act, the FTC imposed on it an administrative fine of NT$150,000.
5. Fong Ling Internet Technology Co., Ltd., a multi-level marketing business, violated (1) Article 7(1) of the Multi-level Marketing Supervision Act by changing its sales system and product items without filing with the FTC in advance, (2) Subparagraph 1 of Article 14 of the same act for failing to include the contents of participant training courses in participation contracts, and (3) Article 24 in applying mutatis mutandis Article 20 (2) and 21 (2) of the same act for failing to process participant withdrawals and returned products after participant contract cancellation or termination within the statutory period. In addition to ordering the company to immediately cease the (3) unlawful act, the FTC imposed on it an administrative fine of NT$3.8 million.
6. Hsiao-Pi Internet Technology Co., Ltd., a multi-level marketing business, did not file with the FTC before beginning operation. The conduct was in   violation of Article 6 (1) of the Multi-level Marketing Supervision Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$300,000 on the company.
7. Fun B Enterprise Co., Ltd. marketing the “OCHO solar energy wireless tire pressure gauge” on Yahoo! Kimo Supermall claimed that “according to the relevant rules, a tire pressure gauge has been compulsory for all new vehicles manufactured since November 2014. The rules apply to all automobiles in July 2016.” The claim was false and misleading representation with regard to product affecting transaction decisions that violated Article 21 (1) of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$50,000 on the company.
8. Perfect Resources Taiwan, a multi-level marketing business, violated Article 7 (1) of the Multi-level Marketing Supervision Act by failing to file with the FTC before changing its sales system. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$50,000 on the company.
9. Oristation Co., Ltd., a multi-level marketing business, violated Article 7 (1) of the Multi-level Marketing Supervision Act by failing to file with the FTC before changing its product items and bonus system. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$50,000 on the company.
10. Chinese Digital Advertising Co., Ltd., a multi-level marketing business, violated Article 7 (1) of the Multi-level Marketing Supervision Act by failing to file with the FTC before changing its sales system, participation contract contents and product items. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$150,000 on the company. 

《In case of any discrepancy between the English version and the Chinese Version, the latter shall prevail.》