1. When marketing the Sunrise Longevity Estate 1 (translation) presale homes, Radium Life Tech Co., Ltd. and Newland Harmony Advertising Co., Ltd. did not provide homebuyers with the list of areas held by individual units. Since the list was important transaction information, the practice was obviously unfair conduct able to affection trading order in violation of Article 25 of the Fair Trade Act. Therefore, the FTC imposed administrative fines of NT$600,000 and NT$300,000 on the two companies, respectively.
2. When marketing its Freestyles Freedom Lite blood glucose meters, Abbott Laboratories Services LLC Taiwan Branch (USA) restricted the resale prices of trading counterparts. The practice was in violation of Article 19 (1) of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$300,000 on the company.
3. When applying SEO techniques to do copywriting to market its products, Uniq-Chain Enterprise Co., Ltd. illegitimately used the text for a competitor's trademark. The practice was obviously unfair conduct that exploited the fruit of the work of another. It was able to affect trading order in violation of Article 25 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$50,000 on the company.
4. When marketing an anti-UV super-function patented sunburn protection jacket on its website, 3D.King Garment Co., Ltd. posted the text “Passing the MIT Smile Logo certification.” The claim was in violation of Article 21 (1) of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC issued a warning letter to remind the company to be careful in the future with the content of information about marketed products to ensure its integrity, correctness and authenticity in order not to break the law.
5. When marketing the Qingsenyue (transliteration) housing project, Yongfeng Construction Co., Ltd. and Liansheng Real Estate Broker Co., Ltd. advertised the units as private residences. The claim was a false and misleading representation with regard to use of product and could also affect transaction decisions in violation of Article 21 (1) of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed administrative fines of NT$1.5 million and NT$400,000 on the two companies, respectively.
6. Hetong (transliteration) Construction Co., Ltd. claimed in the advertisement for its Shangheju (transliteration) housing project that Toshiba energy-saving elevators would be used. It was a false and misleading representation with regard to content of product and could also affect transaction decisions in violation of Article 21 (1) of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$400,000 on the company.
7. Comfort Instyle Ltd. and Books.Com Co., Ltd. marketed wooden furniture on the Internet and posted the wording “Material: cypress from North America” and “Made with natural cypress imported from North America.” The claim was in violation of Article 21 (1) of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC issued a warning letter to remind the companies to pay attention to regulations in the Fair Trade Act in order not to break the law.
8. When marketing an "SGS－certified Besthot brand new 2G Fire extinguisher for automobile／home／outdoor rescue—applicable for ABC types of fires；2 pieces a set " on PChome24h.com, PChome Online Inc. and Fast-IC International Co., Ltd. claimed in the advertisement that the product was the only one passing SGS certification. It was a false and misleading representation with regard to quality of product and could also affect transaction decisions in violation of Article 21 (1) of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$100,000 on each company.
9. Fonglin International Digital Marketing Com., Ltd., a multi-level marketing business, violated Article 6 (1) of the Multi-level Marketing Supervision Act by starting operation without filing with the FTC in advance. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$100,000 on the company.

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