目录

（一）送达文书案件

1.福建64家法院共同协助台湾地区两级法院送达文书案

2.江西南昌西湖区法院协助台湾南投地院送达文书案

3.黑龙江高院协助台湾高雄少年及家事法院送达文书案

4.广东东莞中院协助台湾新北地院送达文书案

5.福建福州中院请求台湾法院协助送达文书案

（二）调查取证案件

6.京黑豫粤法院协助台湾台中地院就一诈欺案调查取证案

7.沪苏琼法院协助台湾台中地院就一请求分配剩余财产事件调查取证案

8.北京高院协助台湾高等法院就一损害赔偿事件调查取证案

9.福建莆田中院协助台湾士林地院就一诈欺案调查取证案

10.四川成都中院协助台湾高雄少年及家事法院就一离婚事件调查取证案

11.内蒙古包头中院请求台湾法院协助就一房屋买卖合同纠纷调查取证案

（三）罪赃移交案件

12.陕西西安中院向台湾地区被害人林某某等2人返还财产案

13.广东东莞中院向台湾地区被害人陈某某等17人返还财产案

（四）裁判认可和执行案件

14.林某某向江苏苏州中院申请认可台湾士林地院民事判决案

15.康某向重庆五中院申请认可台湾高雄地院民事判决案

案例1

福建64家法院共同协助台湾地区两级法院送达文书案

——涉602名受送达人及1200余件司法文书送达

（一）请求事项

2014年4月底和7月底，福建省高级人民法院两岸司法互助协议联络人先后收到台湾地区法务主管部门协议联络人分两批次提出的共涉1200余件司法文书的送达文书请求书，请求协助送达台湾台中地方法院2013年度易字第3583号、台湾高等法院台中分院2014年度上易字第639号钟某诈欺取财未遂案的一、二审刑事判决书。

（二）办理情况

该文书送达系列案件涉及的受送达人602人分布在福建省64个县市区，涉及一、二审送达司法文书共计1200余件。为在最短的时间内完成文书送达工作，福建高院法官加班加点，逐件逐案核对司法文书，确定具体协助的64家基层法院，及时完成转送。各协助基层法院收到材料后，均做到当日立案、早日送达、早日反馈。涉案受送达人数最多的协助基层法院需送达文书132件。因人口流动性大，许多受送达人的户籍地与经常居住地不一致，难以一次完成送达，加之一些受送达人存在“厌诉”等排斥情绪及“签收即是认可”的法律认识误区，文书送达中所遇到的困难始料未及，但最终全省各协助法院经过通力合作、共同努力，顺利全面完成协助送达。该司法互助系列案件的送达成功率达73%，送达平均耗时15天，比两岸司法互助协议确定的3个月时限缩短75天。

案例2

江西南昌西湖区法院协助台湾南投地院送达文书案

——对同一受送达人9次协助送达

（一）请求事项

自2013年7月2日起至2015年2月10日止，江西省高级人民法院两岸司法互助协议联络人先后9次收到台湾地区法务主管部门协议联络人的送达文书请求书，请求协助送达台湾南投地方法院2013年度重诉字第69号土地所有权移转登记等事件、2014年度声字第62号撤销处分事件等裁定、判决书等司法文书给同一受送达人大陆居民王某某。

（二）办理结果

江西高院根据台方提供的受送达人地址，将该案转送南昌市西湖区人民法院协助办理。送达人员先后9次对同一受送达人王某某进行了直接送达。其中，2013年送达4次、 2014年送达3次，2015年送达2次，均成功完成送达。

案例3

黑龙江高院协助台湾高雄少年及家事法院送达文书案

——尽力查找外出受送达人

（一）请求事项

2013年8月1日，黑龙江省高级人民法院两岸司法互助协议联络人收到台湾地区法务主管部门协议联络人的送达文书请求书，请求协助送达台湾高雄少年及家事法院2013年度婚字第406号离婚事件法庭通知书及民事起诉状给受送达人大陆居民艾某。

（二）办理情况

黑龙江高院及时将有关材料转送佳木斯市向阳区法院予以协助。向阳区法院在送达过程中发现，受送达人已经离开台方提供的送达地址搬迁至上海，且该送达地址并无受送达人法定代收人可代收。黑龙江高院了解到上述情况后，秉承尽最大努力予以协助的精神，开始在受送达人熟识的人群中多方多次寻找受送达人的在沪地址及联系方式。最终从受送达人一名同学处获得其手机号码，与受送达人取得了联系。考虑寻找受送达人已经花费不少时间，为提高效率，减少周转环节，黑龙江高院决定直接以法院专递方式将受送达人告知的在沪地址作为实际送达地址将相关文书予以送达，最终于2013年11月13日成功送达。

2014年1月3日，黑龙江高院两岸司法互助协议联络人再次收到台湾地区法务主管部门协议联络人的送达文书请求书，请求协助送达台湾高雄少年及家事法院2013年度婚字第406号离婚事件法庭通知书及民事裁定书给受送达人，黑龙江高院采取相同送达方式，于2014年1月11日予以成功送达。

案例4

广东东莞中院协助台湾新北地院送达文书案

——地址不明仍尽力协查并成功送达

（一）请求事项

2014年5月6日，广东省高级人民法院两岸司法互助协议联络人收到台湾地区法务主管部门协议联络人的送达文书请求书，请求协助送达台湾新北地方法院2010年度诉字第179号返还欠款事件判决书给受送达人大陆居民曾某某。

（二）办理情况

广东高院及时将有关材料转送东莞市中级人民法院予以协助。东莞中院收到材料后，立即赴台方提供的送达地址进行直接送达。但到达该地址送达时发现，该档口已经转让，不再由曾某某经营。承办法官经向现经营者了解询问，同时连续几天向附近商户、商场管理处进行咨询，经过法院主导多方努力寻找，终于获得曾某某的联系电话。在取得联系后得知，曾某某现经营地址在广州市萝岗区。为尽快完成送达，体现高效、便民的原则，东莞中院承办法官直接赴广州找到曾某某，在确认其身份后，于2014年6月16日将有关文书直接送达给了曾某某。

案例5

福建福州中院请求台湾法院协助送达文书案

——台湾法院协助大陆法院成功送达

（一）请求事项

2013年7月 2日，福建省高级人民法院两岸司法互助协议联络人向台湾地区法务主管部门协议联络人发出送达文书请求书，请求协助向台湾居民郭某某、倪某某及乔福塑胶（福州）有限公司送达福州市中级人民法院受理的原告倪某某诉被告郭某某、倪某某及第三人乔福塑胶（福州）有限公司股权转让合同纠纷一案的应诉通知书、起诉状副本、证据副本、举证通知书、合议庭组成人员告知书、送达地址确认书、开庭传票等相关司法文书。

（二）办理结果

台湾台中地方法院根据福州中院提供的受送达人的地址，及时完成了向3名受送达人的送达，其中向2名被告直接送达，向1名被告寄存送达。本案有2名被告在法定举证期限内向福州中院递交了授权委托书、答辩状以及证据材料。台湾台中地方法院成功完成送达并及时反馈，有力地促成了该股权转让合同纠纷成功审结，取得了良好的法律效果与社会效果。

案例6

京黑豫粤法院协助台湾台中地院就一诈欺案调查取证案

——多地法院和多家银行共同协助完成电信诈骗案取证

（一）请求事项

2014年5月13日，最高人民法院两岸司法互助协议联络人收到台湾地区法务主管部门协议联络人的第1030056467号调查取证请求书及所附台湾台中地方法院2014年度易字第947号诈欺案件之相关材料，请求协助查询20个银行账户的开户人基本资料、账户交易明细表，并依账户交易明细表内汇款记录，调取被害人汇款时所填之汇款单，查明被害人为何人，并制作笔录。

（二）办理情况

最高人民法院收到台方请求书后，经审查发现，该案涉及一起跨境电信诈骗案，据台方起诉书所述，被告人江某某作为诈骗犯罪集团内的“车手”，使用20张大陆银联卡，通过台湾地区的ATM机大量领取诈欺被害人汇入人头账户之款项。台湾台中地方法院检察署就被告人涉嫌诈欺向台湾台中地院提出刑事检控。

根据台方提供的涉案信息，案涉的银行账户较多，但仅有各银行卡的类别银行名称，而无具体开户银行名称及相关信息。为确定具体协助法院，有针对性地开展协助工作，最高人民法院首先通过中国人民银行协助查询确定涉案20个银行账户所涉及的具体开户银行名称，尔后根据开户银行名称所在地将有关材料转送北京、黑龙江、河南及广东四省市高级人民法院予以协助。

北京高院在协助调查所涉12个银行账户过程中，首先根据已经确认的12张银联卡分别归属于北京市的工商银行、农业银行、中国银行、交通银行、光大银行、民生银行、平安银行以及北京农商银行等8家银行，前往该8家银行查到开户人信息资料、联系电话以及该银联卡涉案期间的所有账户往来明细。然后通过银行预留的开户人联系方式，承办法官分别与12名开户人一一进行电话联系，但仅联系到1名开户人刘某。其他开户人的电话经多次拨打或者无人接听、或者无法接通、或者已停止使用，对此，承办法官一一作了工作记录，并对唯一联系到的开户人刘某，制作了调查笔录。根据与涉案当事人刘某的谈话内容、账户交易明细及北京地区无人报案的情况综合分析，犯罪嫌疑人应当是利用了刘某等人的银行账户，将从他人处骗得的赃款汇入到这些账户并迅速转走。承办法官在规定办案期限内完成涉及北京地区的8家银行账户资料的调查，并对12张银联卡的2271条信息进行分析，形成了《调查笔录》、与各开户人的电话联系《工作记录》及《调查取证说明》等证据资料报送最高人民法院。随后，河南省郑州市中级人民法院、黑龙江省哈尔滨市南岗区人民法院和道里区人民法院、广东省佛山市中级人民法院和广州市中级人民法院亦相继通过有关高级人民法院向最高人民法院报送了协助取得的证据材料。最高人民法院协议联络人在收到取证结果后及时对台予以回复。

案例7

沪苏琼法院协助台湾台中地院就一请求分配剩余财产事件调查取证案

——多地法院协同完成取证

（一）请求事项

2014年1月6日，最高人民法院两岸司法互助协议联络人收到台湾地区法务主管部门协议联络人的调查取证请求书及所附台湾台中地方法院2011年度重家诉字第26号请求分配剩余财产事件相关材料，请求协助查询台湾居民陈某某在大陆之资产明细及其在大陆开设账户于2008年9月18日之余额为何。2014年4月28日，最高人民法院协议联络人再次收到台湾地区法务主管部门协议联络人的补充调查取证请求书，请求协助查询台湾居民陈某某是否买受三亚某假日酒店之房屋。

（二）办理情况

虽台方第一次请求查询事项较为宽泛，但据台方在其所附材料的“民事申请调查证据暨答辩状”中提供的陈某某在大陆的财产线索（包括不动产及银行账号），本着尽力协助和尽可能协助的精神，最高人民法院及时确定协助法院，并于2014年1月13日分别向上海、江苏、海南三地高级人民法院转送相关材料。2014年4月29日最高人民法院再次将台方补充调查取证请求书转送海南高院。在协助中，因上述财产线索涉及多个银行账户且互有交织，沪苏琼三省市有关法院本着通力合作、尽力协助精神，积极开展调查取证协助。后上海市黄浦区人民法院、江苏省昆山市人民法院及海南省三亚市中级人民法院将其调取的证据材料或查询结果按照程序上报最高人民法院。最高人民法院协议联络人于2014年5月16日将有关人民法院取得的全部证据材料回复台方。

案例8

北京高院协助台湾高等法院就一损害赔偿事件调查取证案

——协助调取证据材料达500多页

（一）请求事项

2014年7月28日, 最高人民法院两岸司法互助协议联络人收到台湾地区法务主管部门协议联络人的调查取证请求书及所附台湾高等法院2011年度重上更（二）字第84号损害赔偿事件相关材料，请求协助查明北京市和睦家医院于2009年8月14日是否有名为王某某之病患死亡，并检送死亡证明书或病例供参。

（二）办理情况

北京高院在收到最高人民法院转送的上述材料后，及时先行电话联系北京市和睦家医院医务处，经询问了解到该院确有台湾高等法院调查取证请求书所描述的名为王某某的病患，其死亡证明书以及病例材料存放在该院档案处。为了尽快调取相关证据材料，北京高院承办法官前往和睦家医院调查取证。因病例资料庞杂，且部分内容如病房查房记录表等无需调取，承办法官遂与和睦家医院档案处、医务处工作人员共同对相关资料予以甄别、调取。经过几天的工作，共调取死亡证明书和病例资料等共计500多页。最高人民法院两岸司法互助协议联络人在收到取证结果后及时对台予以回复。

案例9

福建莆田中院协助台湾士林地院就一诈欺案调查取证案

——及时规范完整协助取证

（一）请求事项

2013年9月9日及9月16日，最高人民法院两岸司法互助协议联络人分别收到台湾地区法务主管部门协议联络人的调查取证请求书、补充调查取证请求书及所附台湾士林地方法院审理的2013年度易字第222号诈欺案件相关材料，请求协助取得相关笔录、鉴定报告、现场照片等众多证据材料。

（二）办理情况

该案涉及台湾地区民众瞩目的胡某某断掌骗保案。胡某某系台湾地区居民，先后向台湾地区两家保险公司分别投保平安险后，于2011年11月3日在福建省莆田市涵江区江口镇某处，持购买来的斩骨刀自残左手手掌。胡某某向台湾地区保险公司申请保险理赔。保险公司认为胡某某涉嫌制造保险意外事故并诈领保险金，故拒绝理赔并报警。

福建高院收到最高人民法院转送的台方请求书及相关材料后，立即指派专人指导莆田市中级人民法院协助办理。莆田中院办案法官克服本案涉及取证单位众多、调查事项庞杂及本身结案繁忙的困难，连续加班加点，在规定办理的时间内针对台方请求调查的具体事项，逐一调取了包括证人证言、当事人陈述、鉴定报告、现场相片等在内的书证、物证及视听资料等证据材料共392页。调取的证据材料全面、规范、完整，形成完整的证据链，圆满完成了协助工作。最高人民法院两岸司法互助协议联络人在收到取证结果后及时对台予以回复，胡某某最终因自残骗保而被台湾方面绳之以法。

案例10

四川成都中院协助台湾高雄少年及家事法院就一离婚事件调查取证案

——尽心尽责细致协助取证

（一）请求事项

2014年11月3日，最高人民法院两岸司法互助协议联络人收到台湾地区法务主管部门协议联络人的调查取证请求书及所附台湾高雄少年及家事法院2014年度婚字第514号离婚事件相关材料，请求确定所附材料结婚证上照片是否为岳某某本人，如不是其本人，请求确认照片上的人是何人及其现住所地。

（二）办理情况

台方此次请求协助调查取证与之前四川省高级人民法院协助台方送达此案文书回复情况密切相关。2014年8月10日，四川高院两岸司法互助协议联络人收到台湾地区法务主管部门协议联络人送达文书请求，请求协助送达台湾高雄少年及家事法院2014年度婚字第514号离婚事件司法文书给受送达人大陆居民岳某某。在协助文书送达过程中，岳某某称其从未与台湾地区的任何人结婚，并拒绝签收相关司法文书。四川高院遂将上述送达情况及时回复台方。成都市中级人民法院在收到此次最高人民法院和四川高院转送的台方请求协助调查取证材料后，经研究，决定先从台方所附公证书入手，承办法官先赴成都市律政公证处（原四川省公证处）调取了涉案当事人结婚公证书档案，包括结婚证复印件、岳某某身份证复印件等材料，后前往四川省民政厅调取了涉案当事人结婚登记原始档案，调取涉案当事人结婚登记申请书、审批表、岳某某户口簿、身份证等材料。尔后，承办法官驱车200多公里到岳某某户籍所在地公安局调取了其户籍证明、该局签发的岳某某身份证复印件，同时在本地找到岳某某本人，就台方所提出的调查内容及涉及的相关问题对岳某某进行了询问，并制作了询问笔录，取得了岳某某本人的身份证复印件、户口簿复印件，并征得岳某某同意在现场拍摄岳某某照片一张。承办法官从岳某某户籍所在地公安局调取的岳某某身份证复印件照片与台方请求调查书中所附结婚公证书上照片（亦即四川省民政厅留存的结婚证照片）进行比对识别发现，两照片上的女士为不同的人，即涉案结婚证上照片女方不是岳某某本人，对岳某某的询问内容及本人现照亦可印证此点。至于台方所附材料中照片上的女方为何人，因信息有限协助法院无法进一步核实。四川高院将协助法院取得的证据材料在规定的时限内送交最高人民法院，然后由最高人民法院协议联络人及时对台予以回复。

案例11

内蒙古包头中院请求台湾法院协助就一房屋买卖合同纠纷调查取证案

——经台湾法院协助取证台方当事人主动应诉并达成和解

（一）请求事项

2014年 4月30日，最高人民法院两岸司法互助协议联络人向台湾地区法务主管部门协议联络人发出调查取证请求书，就内蒙古自治区包头市中级人民法院审理的一起房屋买卖合同纠纷，请求台方协助提供台湾居民游某某的身份证编号及其详细地址，并向其送达应诉通知书、起诉状副本、举证通知书等相关司法文书。

（二）办理情况

该案经台湾宜兰地方法院协助，全面完成了大陆法院请求事项，并于2014年6月4日及时完成了向受送达人的送达。最高人民法院协议联络人于2014年6月15日收到台方回复材料。受送达人游某某接到大陆法院的文书后，专程从台湾赶到包头参加诉讼，与原告王某某自行达成了庭外和解并实际履行，原告向法庭申请撤诉并被准许，案件得以圆满解决。

案例12

陕西西安中院向台湾地区被害人林某某等2人返还财产案

——陕西法院第一起涉台罪赃移交司法互助案

（一）基本案情

该案系一起电信诈骗犯罪案。陕西省西安市中级人民法院审理查明：2009年10月下旬，被告人李家栋等18人（均系台湾地区居民）在租赁的陕西省西安市未央区，租用网络电话，冒充台湾地区基隆市警察局、基隆地方法院检察署工作人员，多次向台湾居民拨打电话，以其银行账户涉案为由，骗取其银行账户详细信息实施诈骗。该犯罪集团分别于2009年11月22日和26日，先后诈骗被害人台湾居民林某某、李某某新台币共计109万元（折合人民币230711.45元）。西安中院经审理，在依法判处涉案被告人刑罚的同时，积极促成被告人部分退赔。

（二）办理情况

根据判决已经确定的退赔及返还数额，西安中院在两岸司法互助协议项下通过陕西高院报请，由最高人民法院协议联络人于2014年7月31日向台湾地区法务主管部门联络人作出讯息通报并提出送达文书、调查取证及罪赃移交请求。台方协助确认了涉案两名台湾被害人的相关信息并经被害人签署有关文件反馈大陆法院后，西安中院据此于2015年3月23日将被告人已经退缴的赃款人民币9900元（约合新台币50000元）汇入两名被害人在台湾开立的账户。

案例13

广东东莞中院向台湾地区被害人陈某某等17人返还财产案

——广东法院第一起涉台罪赃移交司法互助案

（一）基本案情

该案系一起电信诈骗犯罪案。经广东省东莞市中级人民法院、广东省高级人民法院审理查明：2009年6月，被告人范裕榔伙同他人在东莞市接手管理珠海奇盛贸易有限公司长安分公司（以下简称奇盛公司），从事电信诈骗活动。奇盛公司对外以电话推销茶叶为名，先后纠集了40余名台湾地区人员和40余名大陆女子，在购得大量台湾居民个人信息资料后，通过冒充台湾地区检察官、警察队长、警员和医院护士等身份，通过拨打电话方式进行诈骗。截至2009年10月被公安机关当场抓获，范裕榔等43名被告人（其中范裕榔等31人为台湾地区居民）共实际骗取19名台湾地区被害人钱款折合人民币768万余元。本案涉案被告人和被害人人数众多，犯罪手段具有很强的欺骗性和社会危害性，一审判决和二审裁定在依法判处涉案被告人刑罚的同时，判决将随案移送的赃款按比例退还被害人。

（二）办理情况

根据判决已经确定的返还数额，东莞中院在两岸司法互助协议项下通过广东高院报请，由最高人民法院两岸司法互助协议联络人于2014年5月6日向台湾地区法务主管部门协议联络人作出讯息通报并提出送达文书、调查取证及罪赃移交请求。台方协助确认了涉案19名被害人的相关信息（其中有1名被害人明确表示放弃受领相关款项，1名被害人下落不明），向有关被害人送达了大陆法院裁判文书、刑事退赔分配方案，17名被害人反馈了由本人签名的财产返还信息表及有关身份信息和银行账户资料。东莞中院据此于2015年6月25日将17名被害人应受偿款项人民币19万余元（约合新台币92万余元）汇入其在台湾地区开立的银行账户。

案例 14

林某某向江苏苏州中院申请认可台湾士林地院民事判决案

（一）基本案情

2013年 8月23日，台湾居民林某某以台湾居民吴某某侵占股票款等为由，向台湾士林地方法院提起刑事附带民事损害赔偿诉讼。2013年9月23日，台湾士林地院作出2013年度重诉字第315号民事判决，判决吴某某向林某某给付新台币44779595元，及自2012年3月20日至清偿日止，按年息5%计算之利息，并负担诉讼费。该院出具《台湾士林地方法院判决确定证明书》，证明2013年度重诉字第315号民事判决已于2013年10月31日确定。

因本案涉及的被执行财产在江苏省苏州市，2014年6月9日, 林某某向苏州市中级人民法院申请认可台湾士林地方法院2013年度重诉字第315号民事判决。

（二）裁判结果

苏州中院审查认为，申请人林某某提供的台湾士林地方法院2013年度重诉字第315号民事判决、开庭通知的送达证书、判决确定证明书，均由台湾公证部门公证，并经江苏省公证协会证明，对其真实性予以认定。上述证据证明吴某某经合法传唤行使了诉讼权利、判决已生效。同时经审查也未发现该判决存在《最高人民法院关于人民法院认可台湾地区有关法院民事判决的规定》第九条所列之不予认可情形，故应认可该判决的效力。依照有关司法解释的规定，该院于2014年8月4日作出民事裁定，对台湾士林地方法院2013年度重诉字第315号民事判决的法律效力予以认可。

案例15

康某向重庆五中院申请认可台湾高雄地院民事判决案

（一）基本案情

2004年6月1日，大陆居民康某与台湾居民黄某某在重庆市涉外婚姻登记处登记结婚。2005年3月，黄某某以无法取得联络、未共同生活为由，向台湾高雄地方法院提起离婚诉讼。2006年3月9日，台湾高雄地方法院作出2005年度婚字第1497号民事判决，判决准黄某某与康某离婚，诉讼费用由康某承担。2014年3月24日，台湾高雄少年及家事法院（台湾高雄地方法院家事法庭于2012年6月1日移拨台湾高雄少年及家事法院）出具（补发）《判决确定证明书》，证明2005年度婚字第1497号民事判决已于2006年6月1日确定。

2014年5月22日，康某向重庆市第五中级人民法院申请认可台湾高雄地方法院2005年度婚字第1497号民事判决。

（二）裁判结果

重庆五中院审查认为，台湾高雄地方法院依黄某某离婚诉讼请求，在合法传唤康某到庭应诉，且康某未在规定日期到庭参加言辞辩论的情况下，作出“准黄某某与康某离婚；诉讼费用由康某负担”的判决，并于2014年3月24日出具该判决业于2006年6月1日已生效的确定证明书。根据该案证据，可以确认台湾高雄地方法院就原告黄某某与被告康某离婚纠纷一案于2006年3月9日作出的2005年度婚字第1497号民事判决的真实性，且该判决不具有依法不予认可的情形。依照有关司法解释的规定，该院于2014年8月10日作出民事裁定，对台湾高雄地方法院2005年度婚字第1497号民事判决内容为“准黄某某与康某离婚”的法律效力予以认可。

catalogue

（1） Delivery of documents case

1. 64 courts in Fujian jointly assisted two levels of courts in Taiwan in delivering documents

2. Case of Xihu District Court in Nanchang, Jiangxi Assisting Nantou District Court in Delivery of Documents in Taiwan

3. Case of Heilongjiang High Court Assisting Taiwan's Kaohsiung Youth and Family Court in Service of Documents

4. Guangdong Dongguan Intermediate People's Court Assisted Taiwan's New Taipei District People's Court in Delivering Documents

5. Case of Fujian Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court Requesting Taiwan Court to Assist in Service of Documents

（2） Investigation and evidence collection cases

6. Beijing Heiyu Guangdong Court Assists Taiwan Taichung District Court in Investigating and Obtaining Evidence in a Fraud Case

7. Shanghai Suqiong Court Assisted Taiwan Taichung District Court in Investigating and Collecting Evidence on a Request for Distribution of Remaining Property

8. Beijing High Court Assists Taiwan High Court in Investigating and Obtaining Evidence on a Damage Compensation Event

9. Fujian Putian Intermediate Court Assists Taiwan Shilin District Court in Investigating and Obtaining Evidence in a Fraud Case

10. Sichuan Chengdu Intermediate People's Court Assists Taiwan's Kaohsiung Youth and Family Court in Investigating and Obtaining Evidence in a Divorce Case

11. Inner Mongolia Baotou Intermediate People's Court requested the Taiwan Court to assist in the investigation and evidence collection of a housing sales contract dispute

（3） Cases of transferring criminal and stolen goods

12. Case of Shaanxi Xi'an Intermediate People's Court Returning Property to Two Victims in Taiwan, including Lin

13. Case of Guangdong Dongguan Intermediate People's Court Returning Property to 17 Victims including Chen in Taiwan

（4） Judgment recognition and enforcement of cases

14. Lin applied to Suzhou Intermediate People's Court in Jiangsu Province for recognition of the civil judgment of Taiwan Shilin District Court

15. Kang applied to the Chongqing Fifth Intermediate People's Court for recognition of the civil judgment of the Kaohsiung District Court in Taiwan

Case 1

64 Courts in Fujian Jointly Assist Two Levels of Courts in Taiwan in Delivering Documents

——Involving 602 recipients and delivery of over 1200 judicial documents

（1） Request Items

At the end of April and July 2014, the contact person of the High people's court of Fujian Province for the cross-strait mutual legal assistance agreement received the letter of request for service of more than 1200 judicial documents submitted by the contact person of the agreement of the competent legal department in Taiwan in two batches, requesting assistance in the service of more than 1200 judicial documents to the Taichung District Court of Taiwan in 2013, No. 3583, and the Taichung Branch of the Taiwan High Court in 2014, No. 639 Second instance criminal judgment.

（2） Handling status

The series of cases involving the delivery of documents involves 602 recipients distributed in 64 counties and cities in Fujian Province, involving a total of over 1200 judicial documents delivered in the first and second instance. In order to complete the document delivery work in the shortest possible time, judges of the Fujian High Court worked overtime to verify judicial documents case by case, and identified 64 grassroots courts for specific assistance, completing the transfer in a timely manner. After receiving the materials, each assisting grassroots court shall file the case on the same day, deliver it as soon as possible, and provide feedback as soon as possible. The highest number of assisted grassroots courts involved in the case require the delivery of 132 documents. Due to the large population mobility, many of the recipients' registered residence is not consistent with their regular residence, which makes it difficult to complete the service at one time. In addition, some of the recipients have exclusion feelings such as "being disgusted with litigation" and legal misconceptions such as "signing for is recognition". The difficulties encountered in the process of document service were unexpected, but ultimately, all the assisting courts in the province successfully completed the assisted service through full cooperation and joint efforts. The successful delivery rate of this series of judicial mutual assistance cases reached 73%, with an average delivery time of 15 days, which is 75 days shorter than the three-month time limit determined in the cross-strait judicial mutual assistance agreement.

Case 2

Case of Xihu District Court in Nanchang, Jiangxi Assisting Nantou District Court in Delivery of Documents in Taiwan

——9 assisted deliveries to the same recipient

（1） Request Items

From July 2, 2013 to February 10, 2015, the contact person of the High people's court of Jiangxi Province in the cross-strait mutual legal assistance agreement has received the letter of request for service from the contact person of the agreement of the competent legal department in Taiwan for nine times, requesting assistance in the service of the land ownership transfer registration and other events of the Nantou District Court in 2013, the cancellation of the disposal event in 2014, etc Judicial documents such as judgments shall be delivered to the same recipient, mainland resident Wang.

（2） Processing results

The Jiangxi High Court transferred the case to the People's Court of Xihu District, Nanchang City for assistance according to the address of the addressee provided by Taiwan. The delivery personnel have directly delivered the same recipient, Wang, 9 times. Among them, delivery was successfully completed four times in 2013, three times in 2014, and two times in 2015.

Case 3

Heilongjiang High Court Assists Taiwan Kaohsiung Juvenile and Family Court in Delivering Documents

——Try your best to find the outgoing recipient

（1） Request Items

On August 1, 2013, the contact person of the High people's court of Heilongjiang Province for the cross-strait mutual legal assistance agreement received a letter of request for service from the contact person of the legal department in charge of Taiwan, requesting assistance in serving the court notice and civil petition of divorce event No. 406 [2013] of the Kaohsiung Juvenile and Family Court in Taiwan to the mainland resident Ai.

（2） Handling status

The Heilongjiang High Court promptly forwarded the relevant materials to the Xiangyang District Court of Jiamusi City for assistance. During the delivery process, the Xiangyang District Court found that the recipient had left the delivery address provided by the Taiwan side and relocated to Shanghai, and there was no legal representative of the recipient to receive the service at that address. After learning about the above situation, Heilongjiang High Court, adhering to the spirit of making every effort to assist, began to search for the recipient's address and contact information in Shanghai multiple times among people familiar to the recipient. Finally, we obtained their mobile phone number from a classmate of the recipient and contacted them. Considering that it has taken a considerable amount of time to search for the recipient of the service, in order to improve efficiency and reduce turnover, the Heilongjiang High Court decided to directly use the court's express delivery method to serve the relevant documents at the address notified by the recipient in Shanghai as the actual delivery address. The documents were ultimately successfully delivered on November 13, 2013.

On January 3, 2014, the contact person for the Cross Strait Judicial Mutual Assistance Agreement of the Heilongjiang High Court once again received a request for service of documents from the contact person for the agreement from the legal department in Taiwan, requesting assistance in delivering the divorce notice and civil ruling of the 2013 Marriage No. 406 of the Kaohsiung Youth and Family Court to the recipient. The Heilongjiang High Court adopted the same service method and successfully delivered it on January 11, 2014.

Case 4

Guangdong Dongguan Intermediate People's Court Assisted Taiwan's New Taipei District People's Court in Delivering Documents

——Despite unknown address, we tried our best to cooperate and successfully delivered the package

（1） Request Items

On May 6, 2014, the contact person of the High people's court of Guangdong Province for the cross-strait mutual legal assistance agreement received the letter of request for service from the contact person of the legal department in charge of Taiwan, requesting assistance in serving the judgment of the New North District Court of Taiwan on the return of arrears (2010 Annual Action No. 179) to the mainland resident Zeng.

（2） Handling status

The Guangdong High Court promptly forwarded relevant materials to the Intermediate people's court of Dongguan City for assistance. After receiving the materials, Dongguan Intermediate People's Court will immediately deliver them directly to the delivery address provided by the Taiwan side. But upon arrival at the address, it was discovered that the file had been transferred and was no longer operated by Zeng. The presiding judge inquired with the current business operator and consulted with nearby merchants and mall management offices for several consecutive days. After the court led multiple efforts to search, he finally obtained the contact number of Mr. Zeng. After getting in touch, we learned that Zeng's current business address is in Luogang District, Guangzhou City. In order to complete the delivery as soon as possible, reflecting the principles of efficiency and convenience, the presiding judge of the Dongguan Intermediate People's Court directly went to Guangzhou to find Zeng. After confirming his identity, he directly delivered the relevant documents to Zeng on June 16, 2014.

Case 5

Case of Fujian Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court Requesting Taiwan Court to Assist in Service of Documents

——Taiwan Court Assists Mainland Court in Successfully Delivering Service

（1） Request Items

On July 2, 2013, the contact person of the High people's court of Fujian Province for the cross-strait mutual legal assistance agreement sent a letter of request for service of documents to the contact person of the competent legal department in Taiwan, requesting assistance in delivering the documents to Taiwan residents Guo XX, Ni XX and Qiaofu Plastic (Fuzhou) Co., Ltd. to the plaintiff Ni XX v. the defendant Guo XX accepted by Fuzhou Intermediate people's court The notice of response, copy of indictment, copy of evidence, notice of adducing evidence, notice of members of the Judicial panel, confirmation of address for service, subpoena for hearing and other relevant judicial documents of the case of equity transfer contract dispute between Ni and the third person Qiaofu Plastic (Fuzhou) Co., Ltd.

（2） Processing results

The Taichung District Court in Taiwan promptly completed the delivery to three recipients based on the address provided by the Fuzhou Intermediate Court, including direct delivery to two defendants and deposit delivery to one defendant. In this case, two defendants submitted power of attorney, defense, and evidence materials to the Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court within the statutory evidentiary period. The Taichung District Court in Taiwan successfully completed the delivery and provided timely feedback, effectively facilitating the successful resolution of the dispute over the equity transfer contract, achieving good legal and social effects.

Case 6

Beijing Heiyu Guangdong Court Assists Taiwan Taichung District Court in Investigating and Obtaining Evidence in a Fraud Case

——Several courts and banks jointly assisted in the collection of evidence in Phone fraud cases

（1） Request Items

On May 13, 2014, the contact person of the Cross Strait Judicial Mutual Assistance Agreement of the Supreme People's Court received the investigation and evidence collection request letter No. 1030056467 from the contact person of the Taiwan legal authority agreement, as well as the relevant materials of the fraud case No. 947 of the Taiwan Taichung District Court in 2014. They requested assistance in querying the basic information of the account holders and transaction details of 20 bank accounts, and based on the remittance records in the account transaction details, Retrieve the remittance form filled out by the victim when making the remittance, identify who the victim is, and make a record.

（2） Handling status

After receiving the request from Taiwan, the Supreme People's Court found through examination that the case involved a cross-border Phone fraud case. According to the indictment of Taiwan, the defendant Jiang, as a "driver" in the fraud criminal group, used 20 mainland UnionPay cards to collect a large amount of money remitted to the head account by the fraud victim through the ATM in Taiwan. The Prosecutor's Office of the Taichung District Court in Taiwan has filed a criminal prosecution against the defendant for alleged fraud with the Taichung District Court in Taiwan.

According to the information provided by the Taiwan side, there are many bank accounts involved in the case, but only the bank names of each bank card category are available, without specific bank names and related information. In order to determine the specific assistance to the court and carry out targeted assistance, the Supreme People's Court first confirmed the names of the specific deposit banks involved in the 20 bank accounts involved in the case through the assistance of the People's Bank of China, and then transferred the relevant materials to the High people's court of Beijing, Heilongjiang, Henan and Guangdong provinces and cities for assistance according to the location of the names of the deposit banks.

In the process of assisting in the investigation of the 12 bank accounts involved, the Beijing High Court first went to the 8 banks, including ICBC, Agricultural Bank of China, Bank of China, Bank of Communications, Everbright Bank, Minsheng Bank, Ping An Bank Bank and Beijing Rural Commercial Bank, where the 12 UnionPay cards had been identified, to find out the information and contact numbers of the account holders, as well as the details of all account transactions during the period when the UnionPay cards were involved. Then, through the contact information reserved by the bank for the account holder, the handling judge contacted 12 account holders one by one by phone, but only one account holder Liu was contacted. The phone numbers of other account holders have been repeatedly dialed, left unanswered, unable to be connected, or have ceased to be used. The presiding judge has made work records one by one and made investigation records for the only contact account holder Liu. According to the comprehensive analysis of the conversation with Mr. Liu, the party involved in the case, the account transaction details and the situation that no one reported the case in Beijing, the suspect should have used the bank accounts of Mr. Liu and others to remit the stolen money obtained from others to these accounts and quickly transfer it away. The presiding judge completed the investigation of 8 bank account information related to the Beijing area within the prescribed time limit for handling the case, and analyzed 2271 pieces of information from 12 UnionPay cards, forming the "Investigation Record", telephone contact with each account holder, "Work Record", and "Investigation and Evidence Collection Explanation" and other evidence materials to be submitted to the Supreme People's Court. Subsequently, the Intermediate people's court of Zhengzhou City, Henan Province, the People's Court of Nangang District and the People's Court of Daoli District of Harbin City, Heilongjiang Province, the Intermediate people's court of Foshan City, Guangdong Province, and the Intermediate people's court of Guangzhou City also successively submitted the evidence materials obtained with assistance to the Supreme People's Court through the relevant High people's court. The contact person of the Supreme People's Court shall promptly respond to Taiwan upon receiving the evidence collection results.

Case 7

Shanghai Suqiong Court Assists Taiwan Taichung District Court in Investigating and Collecting Evidence on a Request for Distribution of Remaining Property

——Collaborative completion of evidence collection by multiple courts

（1） Request Items

On January 6, 2014, the contact person of the Cross Strait Judicial Mutual Assistance Agreement of the Supreme People's Court received a request for investigation and evidence collection from the contact person of the Taiwan legal authority agreement, as well as the attached materials related to the 2011 Taichung District Court's request for distribution of remaining property. They requested assistance in inquiring about the asset details of Taiwanese resident Chen in mainland China and the balance of his account opened in mainland China on September 18, 2008. On April 28, 2014, the contact person for the agreement of the Supreme People's Court received a supplementary investigation and evidence collection request from the contact person for the agreement of the legal department in Taiwan, requesting assistance in investigating whether Taiwanese resident Chen had purchased a house at a holiday hotel in Sanya.

（2） Handling status

Although the first request for inquiry by the Taiwan side was relatively broad, according to the clues of Chen's property in mainland China (including real estate and bank accounts) provided by the Taiwan side in the "Civil Application Investigation Evidence and Defense" attached to the materials, the Supreme People's Court promptly determined to assist the court in a spirit of utmost assistance and assistance, and on January 13, 2014, the Supreme People's Court reported to Shanghai, Jiangsu, and The High people's court of three places in Hainan forwarded relevant materials. On April 29, 2014, the Supreme People's Court once again forwarded the Taiwan side's request for supplementary investigation and evidence collection to the Hainan High Court. In the assistance, due to the involvement of multiple bank accounts and interweaving of the above-mentioned property clues, the relevant courts of Shanghai, Suzhou, and Qiong provinces and cities actively carry out investigation and evidence collection assistance in a spirit of cooperation and utmost assistance. Later, Shanghai Huangpu District People's Court, Kunshan People's Court of Jiangsu Province and Intermediate people's court of Sanya City of Hainan Province reported the evidence materials or inquiry results obtained by them to the Supreme People's Court according to procedures. The contact person for the Supreme People's Court agreement replied to the Taiwan side on May 16, 2014, regarding all evidence materials obtained by the People's Court.

Case 8

Beijing High Court Assists Taiwan High Court in Investigating and Obtaining Evidence in a Case of Compensation for Damage

——Assisted in retrieving over 500 pages of evidence materials

（1） Request Items

On July 28, 2014, the contact person of the Cross Strait Mutual Judicial Assistance Agreement of the Supreme People's Court received the request for investigation and evidence collection from the contact person of the agreement of the competent department of legal affairs in Taiwan and the attached materials related to the 2011 ZSG (2) Z No. 84 damage compensation event of the Taiwan High Court, requesting assistance in finding out whether the patient named Wang died in Beijing United Family Hospital on August 14, 2009, and submitting the death certificate or case for reference.

（2） Handling status

After receiving the above materials transmitted by the Supreme People's Court, the Beijing High Court promptly contacted the medical office of Beijing United Family Hospital by telephone in advance. Upon inquiry, it was learned that the hospital had a patient named Wang as described in the request for investigation and evidence collection of the Taiwan High Court, and his death certificate and case materials were stored in the archives of the hospital. In order to obtain relevant evidence materials as soon as possible, the judge in charge of the Beijing High Court went to Hemujia Hospital to investigate and collect evidence. Due to the complexity of case data and the fact that some contents, such as ward rounds, do not require retrieval, the presiding judge, together with staff from the archives and medical departments of Hemujia Hospital, screened and retrieved the relevant data. After several days of work, more than 500 pages of death certificates and case data were retrieved. The contact person for the Cross Strait Judicial Mutual Assistance Agreement of the Supreme People's Court shall promptly respond to Taiwan upon receiving the evidence collection results.

Case 9

Fujian Putian Intermediate Court Assists Taiwan Shilin District Court in Investigating and Obtaining Evidence in a Fraud Case

——Timely, standardized and complete assistance in obtaining evidence

（1） Request Items

On September 9 and September 16, 2013, the contact person of the Cross Strait Judicial Mutual Assistance Agreement of the Supreme People's Court received the investigation and evidence collection request, supplementary investigation and evidence collection request, and the accompanying materials related to the 2013 Yi Zi No. 222 fraud case tried by the Taiwan Shilin District Court from the contact person of the Taiwan legal authority agreement, requesting assistance in obtaining numerous evidence materials such as relevant transcripts, appraisal reports, and on-site photos.

（2） Handling status

This case involves the high-profile fraud case of Hu Moumou in Taiwan. Hu Moumou, a resident of Taiwan, took out FPA insurance with two insurance companies in Taiwan, and on November 3, 2011, at a certain place in Jiangkou Town, Hanjiang District, Putian City, Fujian Province, he mutilated his left hand with the purchased bone chopping knife. Hu applied for insurance claims from an insurance company in Taiwan. The insurance company believes that Hu is suspected of causing an insurance accident and fraudulently claiming insurance benefits, so he refused to settle the claim and called the police.

After receiving the Taiwan petition and relevant materials transmitted by the Supreme People's Court, the Fujian High Court immediately assigned a special person to guide the Putian Intermediate people's court to assist in handling. The presiding judge of the Putian Intermediate People's Court overcame the difficulties of numerous evidence collection units, complex investigation matters, and busy closure of the case. They worked overtime continuously and collected 392 pages of documentary evidence, physical evidence, and audio-visual materials, including witness testimony, party statements, appraisal reports, on-site photos, etc., one by one, in response to the specific matters requested by the Taiwan side for investigation within the prescribed processing time. The evidence materials retrieved are comprehensive, standardized, and complete, forming a complete evidence chain and successfully completing the assistance work. The contact person of the Cross Strait Judicial Mutual Assistance Agreement of the Supreme People's Court promptly replied to Taiwan after receiving the evidence collection results, and Hu was ultimately brought to justice by the Taiwan side for self harm and fraudulent insurance.

Case 10

Sichuan Chengdu Intermediate People's Court Assists Taiwan's Kaohsiung Youth and Family Court in Investigating and Obtaining Evidence in a Divorce Case

——Dedicated, responsible, and meticulous assistance in obtaining evidence

（1） Request Items

On November 3, 2014, the contact person of the Cross Strait Mutual Judicial Assistance Agreement of the Supreme People's Court received the request for investigation and evidence collection from the contact person of the agreement of the competent department of legal affairs in Taiwan and the attached materials related to the divorce event of the Kaohsiung Juvenile and Family Court in 2014 Year Marriage Zi No. 514, requesting to determine whether the photo on the attached material Marriage certificate is the person of Yue, and if not, requesting to confirm who the person on the photo is and his current address.

（2） Handling status

Taiwan's request for assistance in investigation and evidence collection is closely related to the previous reply of the High people's court to assist Taiwan in serving the case documents. On August 10, 2014, the contact person for the Cross Strait Judicial Mutual Assistance Agreement of the Sichuan High Court received a request for service of documents from the contact person for the agreement from the legal department in Taiwan, requesting assistance in delivering the judicial document for the 2014 divorce case of the Kaohsiung Youth and Family Court to Yue, a resident of the People's Republic of China, to be served. During the process of assisting in the delivery of documents, Yue claimed that he had never married anyone in Taiwan and refused to sign for relevant judicial documents. Sichuan High Court promptly replied to the Taiwan side regarding the above delivery situation. The Intermediate people's court of Chengdu, after receiving the Taiwan's request for assistance in the investigation and evidence collection sent by the Supreme People's Court and the Sichuan High Court, decided to start with the public certificate attached by the Taiwan side after study, Afterwards, I went to the Civil Affairs Department of Sichuan Province to retrieve the original marriage registration files of the parties involved, as well as the marriage registration application form, approval form, Yue's household registration book, ID card and other materials. Later, the case judge drove more than 200 kilometers to the public security bureau where Yuemou's registered residence was located to obtain his registered residence certificate and a copy of Yuemou's ID card issued by the bureau. At the same time, he found Yuemou himself locally, asked Yuemou about the investigation content and related issues raised by Taiwan, made a record of the inquiry, and obtained copies of Yuemou's ID card and residence booklet, And obtain the consent of Yue to take a photo of Yue on site. The judge in charge compared the photo of the copy of Yue's ID card taken from the public security bureau of the place where Yue's registered residence is located with the photo on the marriage notarial certificate attached to the Taiwan request for investigation (that is, the photo of the Marriage certificate kept by the Civil Affairs Department of Sichuan Province). It was found that the woman in the two photos was different, that is, the woman in the photo on the Marriage certificate involved was not Yue himself. This can also be confirmed by the inquiry content of Yue and his current photo. As for the woman in the photo attached by the Taiwan side, due to limited information, the court is unable to further verify. The Sichuan High Court will assist the court in obtaining evidence materials and submit them to the Supreme People's Court within the prescribed time limit, and then the Supreme People's Court will promptly respond to Taiwan through an agreed contact person.

Case 11

Inner Mongolia Baotou Intermediate People's Court requested the Taiwan Court to assist in the investigation and evidence collection of a housing sales contract dispute

——Assisted by a Taiwanese court in obtaining evidence, the Taiwanese parties actively responded to the lawsuit and reached a settlement

（1） Request Items

On April 30, 2014, the contact person of the Supreme People's Court for the cross-strait mutual legal assistance agreement sent a request for investigation and evidence collection to the contact person of the competent legal department in Taiwan, requesting the Taiwan side to assist in providing the ID card number and detailed address of a Taiwan resident, and serving him with a notice of response, a copy of the indictment Notice of proof and other relevant judicial documents.

（2） Handling status

The case was assisted by the Yilan District Court in Taiwan, and the mainland court's request was fully completed. On June 4, 2014, the service to the recipient was promptly completed. The contact person for the Supreme People's Court agreement received the response materials from the Taiwan side on June 15, 2014. After receiving the document from the mainland court, the recipient, Mr. You, made a special trip from Taiwan to Baotou to participate in the lawsuit. He reached an out of court settlement with the plaintiff, Mr. Wang, and actually fulfilled it. The plaintiff applied to the court to withdraw the lawsuit and was granted permission, and the case was successfully resolved.

Case 12

Case of Shaanxi Xi'an Intermediate People's Court Returning Property to Two Victims including Lin in Taiwan

——The First Case of Judicial Mutual Assistance Involving Taiwan Related Crimes and Illegal Goods Transferred by Shaanxi Court

（1） Basic facts of the case

This case is a crime of Phone fraud. The Intermediate people's court of Xi'an City, Shaanxi Province found that in late October 2009, the defendant Li Jiadong and other 18 people (all residents of Taiwan) rented Internet phones in Weiyang District, Xi'an City, Shaanxi Province, pretending to be the staff of Keelung Police Bureau and the Procuratorial Office of Keelung Local Court in Taiwan, and repeatedly made phone calls to Taiwan residents to defraud their bank account details and commit fraud on the grounds of their bank account involvement. On November 22 and 26, 2009, the criminal group defrauded victims Lin and Li, Taiwan residents, of a total of NT $1.09 million (equivalent to RMB 230711.45). After trial, the Xi'an Intermediate People's Court actively facilitated the defendant's partial refund of compensation while sentencing the defendant in accordance with the law.

（2） Handling status

According to the determined refund and refund amount in the judgment, the Xi'an Intermediate People's Court submitted a request through the Shaanxi High Court under the Cross Strait Judicial Mutual Assistance Agreement. On July 31, 2014, the contact person of the Supreme People's Court sent a message to the contact person of the legal department in Taiwan and submitted a request for service of documents, investigation and evidence collection, and transfer of stolen goods. After the Taiwan side assisted in confirming the relevant information of the two Taiwanese victims involved in the case and the victims signed relevant documents to provide feedback to the mainland court, the Xi'an Intermediate People's Court hereby remitted the defendant's refunded stolen money of RMB 9900 (approximately NT $50000) to the accounts opened by the two victims in Taiwan on March 23, 2015.

Case 13

Case of Guangdong Dongguan Intermediate People's Court Returning Property to 17 Victims including Chen in Taiwan

——Guangdong Court's First Case of Transfer of Taiwan Related Crime and Mutual Legal Assistance

（1） Basic facts of the case

This case is a crime of Phone fraud. After hearing by Dongguan Intermediate people's court and High people's court of Guangdong Province, it was found that in June 2009, the defendant Fan Yulang, together with others, took over the management of Chang'an Branch of Zhuhai Qisheng Trading Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Qisheng Company) in Dongguan and engaged in Phone fraud activities. Under the guise of promoting tea over the phone, Qisheng Company has gathered more than 40 personnel from Taiwan and more than 40 women from mainland China. After purchasing a large amount of personal information of Taiwanese residents, they fraudulently impersonated Taiwan prosecutors, police captains, police officers, and hospital nurses by making phone calls. As of October 2009, 43 defendants including Fan Yulang (31 of whom were residents of Taiwan) were arrested by the public security organs on the spot, and a total of 19 victims in Taiwan were actually defrauded of more than RMB 7.68 million. There are a large number of defendants and victims involved in this case, and the criminal methods are highly deceptive and socially harmful. The first and second instance judgments, while sentencing the defendants in accordance with the law, will proportionally refund the stolen funds transferred with the case to the victims.

（2） Handling status

According to the determined return amount in the judgment, the Dongguan Intermediate People's Court submitted a request through the Guangdong High Court under the Cross Strait Judicial Mutual Assistance Agreement. On May 6, 2014, the contact person of the Cross Strait Judicial Mutual Assistance Agreement of the Supreme People's Court sent a message to the contact person of the Taiwan legal department and requested the delivery of documents, investigation and evidence collection, and transfer of stolen goods. The Taiwan side assisted in confirming the relevant information of 19 victims involved in the case (including one victim who clearly stated that they had given up receiving the relevant funds, and one victim whose whereabouts were unknown), and delivered the mainland court judgment documents and criminal refund distribution plans to the relevant victims. 17 victims provided feedback on the property return information form signed by themselves, as well as relevant identity information and bank account information. On June 25, 2015, the Dongguan Intermediate People's Court transferred over 190000 yuan (approximately NT $920000) of the compensation owed to 17 victims to their bank accounts in Taiwan.

Case 14

Lin applied to the Suzhou Intermediate People's Court in Jiangsu Province for recognition of the civil judgment of the Taiwan Shilin District Court

（1） Basic facts of the case

On August 23, 2013, Taiwanese resident Lin filed a criminal incidental civil damages lawsuit with the Shilin District Court of Taiwan, citing the embezzlement of stock funds by Taiwanese resident Wu. On September 23, 2013, the Shilin District Court of Taiwan made the 2013 ZSZ No. 315 civil judgment, ruling that Wu should pay NT $44779595 to Lin, with interest calculated at 5% of annual interest from March 20, 2012 to the settlement date, and bear Court costs. The court issued a "Taiwan Shilin District Court Judgment Confirmation Certificate", proving that the civil judgment No. 315 of 2013 was confirmed on October 31, 2013.

As the property to be executed involved in this case is located in Suzhou, Jiangsu Province, on June 9, 2014, Lin applied to the Intermediate people's court of Suzhou City for recognition of the 2013 ZSZ No. 315 civil judgment of Taiwan Shilin District Court.

（2） Judgment results

The Suzhou Intermediate People's Court has reviewed and found that the civil judgment, hearing notice delivery certificate, and judgment confirmation certificate provided by the applicant Lin in 2013 by the Taiwan Shilin District Court with Chongsui Zi No. 315 have all been notarized by the Taiwan notary department and certified by the Jiangsu Provincial Notary Association to confirm their authenticity. The above evidence proves that Wu has lawfully been summoned to exercise his litigation rights and the judgment has come into effect. At the same time, after examination, it was not found that the judgment was not recognized as listed in Article 9 of the "Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on the Recognition of Civil Judgments by Relevant Courts in Taiwan", so the validity of the judgment should be recognized. According to the relevant judicial interpretation regulations, the court made a civil ruling on August 4, 2014, recognizing the legal effect of the 2013 Civil Judgment No. 315 of the Taiwan Shilin District Court.

Case 15

Kang applied to the Chongqing Fifth Intermediate People's Court for recognition of the civil judgment case of Kaohsiung District Court in Taiwan

（1） Basic facts of the case

On June 1, 2004, mainland resident Kang and Taiwan resident Huang registered their marriage at the Transnational marriage registration office in Chongqing. In March 2005, Huang filed a divorce lawsuit with the Kaohsiung District Court in Taiwan on the grounds of being unable to contact or living together. On March 9, 2006, the Kaohsiung District Court of Taiwan made a civil judgment No. 1497 in 2005, ruling that Huang and Kang would divorce, and the litigation costs would be borne by Kang. On March 24, 2014, the Kaohsiung Juvenile and Family Court in Taiwan (transferred by the Family Court of the Kaohsiung District Court on June 1, 2012) issued (reissued) a "Judgment Confirmation Certificate", proving that the civil judgment No. 1497 of the year 2005 was confirmed on June 1, 2006.

On May 22, 2014, Mr. Kang applied to the Fifth Intermediate people's court of Chongqing for approval of the civil judgment of the Kaohsiung District Court of Taiwan in 2005, Marriage Zi No. 1497.

（2） Judgment results

According to the review of the Fifth Central Court of Chongqing, the Kaohsiung District Court of Taiwan made the judgment of "allowing Huang to divorce Kang; the litigation costs shall be borne by Kang" on March 24, 2014, when Kang was legally summoned to appear in court to answer the lawsuit and Kang did not attend the oral debate on the specified date. Based on the evidence in this case, it can be confirmed that the authenticity of the 2005 Marriage No. 1497 Civil Judgment made by the Kaohsiung District Court in Taiwan on March 9, 2006 regarding the divorce dispute between plaintiff Huang and defendant Kang is not recognized by law. According to the relevant judicial interpretation regulations, the court made a civil ruling on August 10, 2014, recognizing the legal effect of the 2005 civil judgment No. 1497 of the Kaohsiung District Court in Taiwan, which stated that "Huang and Kang are to be divorced".