1. The franchise description brochure Fumao Global Industry Co., Ltd. used to recruit franchisees for the AFU Pet Supply Store chain carried the wording "70％ profit margin guaranteed," but it could not be achieved. Apparently, the claim was a false and misleading representation with regard to content of service and could also affect transaction decisions. The practice was in violation of Paragraph 4 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Act and Paragraph 1 of the same article was applicable mutatis mutandis. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$100,000 on the company.
2. When recruiting franchisees for the Danshui Taiwan Chicken Shop Health-preserving Medicinal Meals chain (translation), Taiwan Chicken Food Co., Ltd. (translation) not only failed to disclose complete important franchise information before contract signature but also deceived and misguided trading counterparts and concealed information regarding franchisees' use of trademark rights. The practice was deceptive and obviously unfair conduct able to affect trading order in violation of Article 25 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$150,000 on the company.
3. Chenyang Company (transliteration) illegitimately used the business symbol of its competitor to post a keyword advertisement. The obviously unfair conduct of exploiting the fruits of work of others was able to affect trading order in violation of Article 25 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$100,000 on the company.
4. When marketing on pure17go.com a US-made miniature outdoor air purifier – Honeywell BabyAir – for baby carriages, Taiwan Television Technology Co., Ltd. claimed the price was the lowest on the market. It was a false and misleading representation with regard to price of product and could also affect transaction decisions in violation of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Fair Trace Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$50,000 on the company.
5. When marketing on pure17go.com a US-made miniature outdoor air purifier – Honeywell BabyAir – for baby carriages, Qin Xuan Trading Co., Ltd. claimed the price was the lowest on the market. The claim was in violation of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC sent a warning letter to remind the company to ensure the integrity, correctness and authenticity of product information when making advertisements in the future in order not to break the law.
6. When marketing the "HP OfficeJet Pro 8730 – a topnotch flagship printer for business use" on PChome Online 24h, PChome Online Inc. and HP Taiwan Information Technology Ltd. posted the wording "Use of black ink per page costing less then NT$0.1 to cut down your expenses...purchase of the 959XL super large capacity black ink cartridge needed." The claim was a false and misleading representation with regard to quality of product and could also affect transaction decisions in violation of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$100,000 on each company.
7. When marketing the "HP OfficeJet Pro 8730 – a topnotch flagship printer for business use" on PChome Online 24h, Synnex Technology International Corp. posted the wording "Use of black ink per page costing less then NT$0.1." The claim was in violation of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC sent a warning letter to remind the company to ensure the integrity, correctness and authenticity of product information in the future in order not to break the law.
8. When marketing a magnetic wireless charger, O-One International Limited Company posted the claim "The first in Taiwan awarded double certification" on PChome 24h, momoshop.com, Kimo.com, tstartel.com, myfone.com, friday.com, Senaonline, eprice.com, shopee.com, rakuten.com and pcone.com. The wording was a false and misleading representation with regard to product and could also affect transaction decisions in violation of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$100,000 on the company.
9. When marketing "MagSafe magnetic wireless car chargers" on momoshop.com, Fubon Multimedia Technology Co., Ltd. posted the claim "The first in Taiwan awarded double certification." It was a false and misleading representation with regard to product and could also affect transaction decisions in violation of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$100,000 on the company.
10. When marketing "MagSafe magnetic wireless car chargers" on qek888.com, Qfanyun Inc. posted the claim "The first in Taiwan awarded double certification." It was a false and misleading representation with regard to product and could also affect transaction decisions in violation of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$50,000 on the company.
11. When marketing MagSafe magnetic charging trays on PChome 24h, PChome Online Inc. posted the claim "The first in Taiwan awarded double certification." It was a false and misleading representation with regard to product and could also affect transaction decisions in violation of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$50,000 on the company.
12. When marketing MagSafe magnetic wireless car chargers on kimo.com, Yahoo! Taiwan Holdings Limited, Taiwan Branch (H.K.) posted the claim "The first in Taiwan awarded double certification." It was a false and misleading representation with regard to product and could also affect transaction decisions in violation of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$50,000 on the company.
13. When marketing MagSafe magnetic wireless car chargers on tstartel.com, Taiwan Star Telecom Corporation Limited posted the claim "The first in Taiwan passing NCC and BSMI certification." It was a false and misleading representation with regard to product and could also affect transaction decisions in violation of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$50,000 on the company.
14. When marketing MagSafe magnetic wireless car chargers on myfone.com, Taiwan Mobile Co., Ltd. posted the claim "The first in Taiwan passing NCC and BSMI safety certification." It was a false and misleading representation with regard to product and could also affect transaction decisions in violation of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$50,000 on the company.
15. When marketing MagSafe magnetic wireless car chargers" on friday.com, Yuanshi Digital Technology Co., Ltd. posted the claim "The first in Taiwan passing NCC and BSMI safety certification." It was a false and misleading representation with regard to product and could also affect transaction decisions in violation of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$50,000 on the company.
16. When marketing MagSafe magnetic wireless car chargers" on Senaonline, Senao International Co., Ltd. posted the claim "The first in Taiwan passing NCC and BSMI safety certification." It was a false and misleading representation with regard to product and could also affect transaction decisions in violation of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$50,000 on the company.
17. When marketing MagSafe magnetic wireless car chargers on eprice.com, Erpic Media, Inc. posted the claim "The first in Taiwan passing NCC and BSMI safety certification." It was a false and misleading representation with regard to product and could also affect transaction decisions in violation of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$50,000 on the company.
18. When marketing MagSafe magnetic wireless car chargers on buy123.com, Kuobrothers Corp. and Shengyu Communications Co., Ltd. (transliteration) posted the claim "The first in Taiwan awarded double certification." It was a false and misleading representation with regard to product and could also affect transaction decisions in violation of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC sent warning letters to remind both companies to fulfill the advertiser's obligation to verify and ensure the authenticity of the content when posting advertisements in the future and immediately make corrections when finding any claims inconsistent with the facts.
19. When marketing O-One MagSafe magnetic wireless car chargers on ee7.com, King's Valley Communications Co., Ltd. posted the claim "The first in Taiwan awarded double certification." It was in violation of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC sent a warning letter to remind the company to fulfill the advertiser's obligation to verify and ensure the authenticity of the content when posting advertisements in the future and immediately make corrections when finding any claims inconsistent with the facts.
20. When marketing MagSafe magnetic wireless charging trays and MagSafe magnetic wireless car chargers on shopee.com, Mimi Intelligence Co., Ltd. (transliteration) posted the claim "The first in Taiwan awarded double certification." It was in violation of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC sent a warning letter to remind the company to fulfill the advertiser's obligation to verify and ensure the authenticity of the content when posting advertisements in the future and immediately make corrections when finding any claims inconsistent with the facts.
21. An individual surnamed Jiang marketed on shopee.com stickers with "Failing to pass Environmental Protection Administration Vehicle Noise Inspections" printed on them. The wording could mislead people to think the stickers were association with a government agency. It was in violation of Paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC sent a warning letter to remind the individual to pay attention to regulations in the Fair Trade Act in order not to break the law.
22. NEP International (Taiwan) Ltd., a multi-level marketing business, violated Paragraph 1 of Article 7 of the Multi-level Marketing Supervision Act by changing its office location without filing with the FTC in advance. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$50,000 on the company.

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