menu
:::
Font size : S M L
::: :::

June, 2018[Decisions]

  1. The Zhu family's company and its affiliates and stakeholders acquired the shares and management rights of Shin Hsiung Natural Gas Co., Ltd., Shin Nan Natural Gas Co., Ltd., Shin Lin Natural Gas Co., Ltd., Shin Chang Natural Gas Co., Ltd. and Shin Miao Natural Gas Co., Ltd., but did not file the mergers with the FTC in accordance with the regulation specified in the Fair Trade Act. Therefore, the FTC cited Article 39 of the Fair Trade Act and imposed administrative fines ranging between NT$200,000 and NT$900,000 on the businesses involved. The fines totaled NT$5.4 million.
  2. Greater Taipei Area Lele Gas Enterprise Co. distributed service notices and made its gas safety inspection personnel wear employee IDs, both of which misled consumers to believe the company was the same enterprise providing natural gas in their neighborhoods. The company's gas safety inspection personnel then used performing gas safety checks as the pretext to push gas safety devices. The overall marketing approach was deceptive conduct able to affect trading order and the company did not immediately cease the unlawful act in violation of Article 25 of the Fair Trade Act after receiving the FTC's Disposition Kung-Ch'u-Tzu No. 105028 dated Apr. 13, 2016. Therefore, the FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$300,000 on the person in charge of the company.
  3. Golden Century (translation) Enterprise Co. held disaster-prevention promotion activities to market its gas shock absorbers without revealing it was a gas safety equipment business. The company announced that gifts would be given to people attending the activities to attract consumers with no intention of making purchases. Then the company also made false statements about the price and quantity of products before its salespeople followed consumers home to install the devices by pushing the products on them. Repeatedly forced or bothered by the salespeople, consumers made the decision to buy as their free will was suppressed. The overall marketing practice was deceptive and obviously unfair conduct able to affect trading order in violation of Article 25 of the Fair Trade Act. Hence, the FTC cited the first section of Article 42 of the same act, ordered the company to immediately cease the unlawful act and also imposed on it an administrative fine of NT$800,000.
  4. You Sen Mei Purification Technology Co., Ltd. adopted deceptive approaches to market its water-revitalizing machines and filters in violation of Article 25 of the Fair Trade Act. Therefore, the FTC cited the first section of Article 42 of the same act, ordered the company to immediately cease the unlawful act and also imposed on it an administrative fine of NT$200,000.
  5. Klight Sport Marketing Co., Ltd. restricted the resale prices of its distributors for bicycle racks. The practice was in violation of Article 19 (1) of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$100,000 on the company.
  6. When marketing the "Cook Power ER-1180 stainless steel rice cooker on the "udnshopping" website, United Daily News Group and Bao Xing (transliteration) Marketing Management Consultancy Co., Ltd. claimed in the advertisement that the product had been "awarded the "National Energy Label." 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$50,000 on each company.
  7. Tian Xing Jian (transliteration) International Youth Startup 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. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$50,000 on the company.
  8. Fonghe Estate Development Co., Ltd. posted an advertisement on the Facebook wall of the "Farm Land and Building Investment, Development and Utilization Exchange Association" and claimed itself as "designated to find industrial land, factory buildings and other types of real estate for the Strait Exchange Foundation." The wording was a false and misleading representation with regard to quality of service and could also affect transaction decisions 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.
  9. Market American Inc. 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$300,000 on the company.
  10. WorldVentures Taiwan, a multi-level marketing business, violated Paragraph 1 of Article 13 and Subparagraph 3 of Article 14 of the Multi-level Marketing Supervision Act by 1) failing to file with the FTC changes in its sales system and participant requirements, participant contract provisions, and product and service items within ten days after receiving the FTC's Disposition Kung-Ch'u-Tzu No. 105136, and 2) not signing written contracts with participants joining its sales schemes or organization and by stipulating in participant contracts product return deduction items that were inconsistent with related regulations and disadvantageous to participants. The company also violated Article 24 of the Multi-level Marketing Supervision Act by 3) failing to process participant withdrawal and returned goods according to statutory calculation formulas within 30 days after contract signature and not processing participant withdrawal and returned goods according to statutory calculation formulas 30 days after contract signature and Article 20 (2) and Article 21 (2) of the same act were applicable mutatis mutandis. Therefore, in addition to ordering the company to immediately cease the 2) and 3) unlawful acts as well as file the changes in its sales system and participant requirements, participant contract provisions and product and service items with the FTC within ten days after receiving the disposition, the FTC also imposed on it an administrative fine of NT$3.6 million.
  11. XY Life Co., Ltd., a multi-level marketing business, violated 1) Subparagraph 1 of Article 14 of the Multi-level Marketing Supervision Act by failing to include statutorily required information in contracts signed with participants and 2) Article 21 (2) of the same act by not processing withdrawal and returned goods according to law after participant contract termination. 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.》

Updated at:2018-07-20 14:41:12
back top
Language中文