1. Foodpanda Taiwan Co., Ltd. imposed restrictions on cooperating restaurants which included the prices posted on its food delivery platform having to be the same as the prices displayed in the restaurants, and the restaurants could not refuse orders for items to be picked up by the customers themselves. The practice was an inappropriate limitation on the business activities of trading counterparts as a condition for the company to continue transactions with the restaurants. It could have led to competition restraints in violation of Subparagraph 5 of Article 20 of the Fair Trade Act. The FTC ordered the company to immediately cease the unlawful act and also imposed on it an administrative fine of NT$2 million.
2. Taipei City Sanyuan Jidi (transliteration) After-class Tutoring School used the name of a competitor to post a keyword advertisement and presented the names of "Ligong (transliteration)" and "Sanyuan" side by side in the heading of the keyword advertisement: "Ligong—Sanyuan After-class Tutoring School the top choice" and "To test into a good school: Ligong—Sanyuan After-class Tutoring School your top choice." The obviously unfair conduct of exploiting the achievements based on the efforts of others was able to affect trading order in violation of Article 25 of the Fair Trade Act. Therefore, the FTC imposed an administrative fine of NT$100,000 on Sanyuan Jidi After-class Tutoring School.
3. Tongguan (transliteration) Gas Engineering Company used gas safety inspection service notices and uniforms that resembled those of the local natural gas provider and concealed the identity of its gas safety equipment vendors to mislead consumers. The practice was in violation of Article 25 of the Fair Trade Act. In addition to ordering the company to immediately cease the unlawful act, the FTC also imposed on it an administrative fine of NT$50,000.
4. When marketing the Whirlpool 8TWGD5620HW 16kg gas-powered tumble dryer on the Eastern shopping website, Eastern Shopping and Leisure Co., Ltd. and Cova Automation Co., Ltd. claimed in the advertisement that the product had been awarded the 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 administrative fines of NT$100,000 on each company.
5. When marketing the 3M FAT10AB air purifier on its website, 3M Taiwan Ltd. posted the text "Awarded the Energy Label by the Ministry of Economic Affairs." 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 the company.
6. Litten Materials Inc. marketed Arc-Flash photocatalyst products on its website, the momo shopping website, PChome 24h website, Yahoo! Kimo shopping mall, 486shop.com, PChome mall (Arc-Flash photocatalyst), bid.yahoo.com (Arc-Flash photocatalyst, formaldehyde removal expert), Yahoo! Kimo super mall (Arc-Flash photocatalyst), Shopee shopping (seller: Arc-Flash), and Rakuten marketplace, etc. and claimed the Arc-Flash catalyst had been certified by the Bureau of Standards, Metrology and Inspection of the Ministry of Economic Affairs, the Industrial Technology Research Institute, Chung-Shan Institute of Science and Technology, the Food Industry Research and Development Institute, and SGS. The company also posted the wording "The product has been certified as harmless to the human body and to be used without worry. It has been certified by the Industrial Technology Research Institute, Chung-Shan Institute of Science and Technology, SGS, etc." and the "photocatalyst has been certified by the Industrial Technology Research Institute, Chung-Shan Institute of Science and Technology, SGS, etc." The practice 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. Besides ordering the company to immediately cease the unlawful act, the FTC also imposed on it an administrative fine of NT$1 million.
7. When marketing the Arc-Flash photocatalyst ＋ far infrared composite easy-to-use spray can (10℅ high concentration 200ml), Arc-flash photocatalyst ＋ nano-silver composite easy-to-use spray can (10℅ high concentration 200ml), Arc-Flash photocatalyst ＋ negative ion composite easy-to-use spray can (10℅ high concentration 200ml), Arc-Flash photocatalyst easy-to-use spray can (10℅ high concentration 200ml, 5 cans per set), and Arc-Flash photocatalyst easy-to-use spray can (10℅ high concentration 200ml) on the PChome 24h shopping site, PChome Online Inc. claimed the photocatalyst products had been certified by the Bureau of Standards, Metrology and Inspection of the Ministry of Economic Affairs, the Industrial Technology Research Institute, Chung-Shan Institute of Science and Technology, the Food Industry Research and Development Institute, and SGS as harmless to the human body and to be used without worry, and that it had been certified by the Industrial Technology Research Institute, Chung-Shan Institute of Science and Technology, SGS, etc. The practice 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. In addition to ordering the company to immediately cease the unlawful act, the FTC also imposed on it and administrative fine of NT$400,000.
8. When marketing the Arc-Flash photocatalyst laundry additive (250g) on the momo shopping website, Fubon Multimedia Technology Co., Ltd. claimed the Arc Flash photocatalyst had been certified by the Bureau of Standards, Metrology and Inspection of the Ministry of Economic Affairs, the Industrial Technology Research Institute, Chung-Shan Institute of Science and Technology, the Food Industry Research and Development Institute, and SGS. The wording 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 ordered the company to immediately cease the unlawful act and also imposed on it an administrative fine of NT$150,000.
9. Yahoo! Taiwan Holdings Limited, Taiwan Branch (H.K.) marketed an Arc-Flash photocatalyst instant aromatic spray for pets on the Yahoo! Kimo shopping center and claimed the effect of the product had been certified by the Bureau of Standards, Metrology and Inspection of the Ministry of Economic Affairs, the Industrial Technology Research Institute, Chung-Shan Institute of Science and Technology, the Food Industry Research and Development Institute, and SGS. The wording 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. In addition to ordering the company to immediately cease the unlawful act, the FTC also imposed on it an administrative fine of fine of NT$100,000.
10. When marketing the Arc-Flash photocatalyst ＋ nano-silver spray can (10℅ high concentration), (two cans per set) on 486shop.com, Baosheng Digital Culture Ltd. claimed the product had been certified by the Bureau of Standards, Metrology and Inspection of the Ministry of Economic Affairs, the Industrial Technology Research Institute, Chung-Shan Institute of Science and Technology, the Food Industry Research and Development Institute, and SGS as harmless to the human body and to be used without worry. The wording 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. Besides ordering the company to immediately cease the unlawful act, the FTC also imposed on it an administrative fine of NT$50,000.