1. Shangfeng (transliteration) Enterprise Co., Ltd. used the pretext of holding raffles to obtain the personal information of participants and concealed its intention to sell products and important trading information to mislead consumers into purchasing living water machines from the company. The overall marketing practice was deceptive and obviously unfair conduct affecting trading order in violation of Article 25 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC cited the first section of Article 42 of the Fair Trade Act, ordered the company to immediately cease the unlawful act and imposed on it an administrative fine of NT$50,000.
2. Asia Pacific Telecom Co., Ltd. sent out text messages to inform consumers of the company’s special offers. The practice was a false and misleading representation to attract customers in violation of Article 21(4) in applying mutatis mutandis Article 21 (1) of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$100,000 on the company.
3. Global Hope Co., Ltd., a multi-level marketing business, violated Subparagraph 1 of Article 14 of the Multi-level Marketing Supervision Act by failing to include all related regulations in the Multi-level Marketing Supervision Act in contracts signed with participants. The FTC ordered the company to sign with participants contracts carrying statutorily required information within 30 days after receiving the disposition and present them to the FTC for reference.
4. Magic Life Taiwan, a multi-level marketing business, violated 1) Article 7 (1) of the Multi-level Marketing Supervision Act by not filing with the FTC before changing its participant requirements, 2) Article 16 (2) of the same act for recruiting people with limited capacity for civil conduct to be participants without acquiring the consent of their legal representatives and attaching it to the participation contract, and 3) Articles 20 (2) and 21 (2) by failing to process participant withdrawal and returned products after contract cancellation and termination. The FTC ordered the company to immediately cease the 2) and 3) unlawful acts after receiving the disposition and present the results of corrective measures for the 2) unlawful act to the FTC for reference within ten days after receiving the disposition. In addition, the FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$1 million on the company.
5. Thanks Ai Taiwan, a multi-level marketing business, violated Article 7 (1) of the Fair Trade Act by not filing with the FTC before changing its sales system. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$50,000 on the company.
6. Xie Xin Enterprises Co., Ltd., a multi-level marketing business, violated 1) Article 7 (1) of the Multi-level Marketing Supervision Act by setting up an order placement center with the characteristics of a sales outlet and changing its participant requirements without filing with the FTC in advance, and 2) Article 21 (2) of the same act for failing to process participant withdrawal and returned products within the statutorily specified period and according to the statutorily specified method of calculation when participants withdrew from the company’s multi-level marketing schemes within 30 days after contract signature. In addition to ordering the company to immediately cease the 2) unlawful act, the FTC imposed on it an administrative fine of NT$400,000.
7. Zunhuang (transliteration) Construction and Development Co., Ltd. and Yujun Real Estate Development Co., Ltd. advertised the product as “exquisite 2-room and one dining/living room unit providing comfortable private living space” and also posted the layouts of the second to the fifth floors to indicate the changing of the original open space into bedrooms and balconies and the original balcony space into part of the living room when marketing the “Jingtailan (transliteration)” housing project. The practice was a false and misleading representation with regard to content and use of product affecting transaction decisions in violation of Article 21 (1) of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed administrative fines of NT$200,000 and NT$100,000 on the two companies, respectively.
8. Dongqi (transliteration) Construction and Development Co., Ltd. used terminology for regular residential buildings in an advertisement for the “~Donghua Xiangjianzhu~ Feifeixiang (transliteration)” housing project located in a Class B industrial zone. It was a false and misleading representation with regard to content and use of product affecting transaction decisions in violation of Article 21 (1) of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$600,000 on the company.

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