October 2017
For an offense of operating banking business illegally, an investor shall not bring civil suit collateral to criminal proceedings against the actor(Taiwan)
2017.7.26
Frank Sun
The Kaohsiung branch of the Taiwan High Court rendered the 105-Yuan-Fu-Min-Shang-1 Decision on Civil Suit Collateral to Criminal Proceedings on July 26, 2017 (hereinafter, the "Decision"), holding that for an offense of operating banking business illegally, an investor shall not bring civil suit collateral to criminal proceedings against the actor.
According to the facts underlying the Decision, the Plaintiff brought a civil suit collateral to criminal proceedings, asserting that the Plaintiff was injured because he was deceived into delivering money to the Defendants, who had engaged in illegal fraud and fund absorption under the pretext of investment. Therefore, the Plaintiff brought an action to compel the return of the money so delivered for reasons such as tort.
According to the Decision, joint solicitation or enticement to attract the purchase of service contracts constitutes an offense of operating banking business illegally. However, offenses in violation of the Banking Law are punishable for breaking the national concession system for the operation of banking business and are by nature offenses that do not directly violate the legal interest of individuals. Since investors are not directly injured by the criminal defendant for violation of the Banking Law, they are not allowed by law to bring a civil suit collateral to criminal proceedings against an actor for the offense of operating the banking business illegally. Therefore, the Plaintiff's appeal is dismissed on such basis, and the original decision against the Plaintiff was upheld.
Frank Sun
The Kaohsiung branch of the Taiwan High Court rendered the 105-Yuan-Fu-Min-Shang-1 Decision on Civil Suit Collateral to Criminal Proceedings on July 26, 2017 (hereinafter, the "Decision"), holding that for an offense of operating banking business illegally, an investor shall not bring civil suit collateral to criminal proceedings against the actor.
According to the facts underlying the Decision, the Plaintiff brought a civil suit collateral to criminal proceedings, asserting that the Plaintiff was injured because he was deceived into delivering money to the Defendants, who had engaged in illegal fraud and fund absorption under the pretext of investment. Therefore, the Plaintiff brought an action to compel the return of the money so delivered for reasons such as tort.
According to the Decision, joint solicitation or enticement to attract the purchase of service contracts constitutes an offense of operating banking business illegally. However, offenses in violation of the Banking Law are punishable for breaking the national concession system for the operation of banking business and are by nature offenses that do not directly violate the legal interest of individuals. Since investors are not directly injured by the criminal defendant for violation of the Banking Law, they are not allowed by law to bring a civil suit collateral to criminal proceedings against an actor for the offense of operating the banking business illegally. Therefore, the Plaintiff's appeal is dismissed on such basis, and the original decision against the Plaintiff was upheld.
