Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens Goes On Trial

任職最長參議員Ted Stevens被訴 隱瞞收禮 接受裝修
[關鍵字 key word]
財產來源不明罪
不實陳述罪

[文章內容]
84歲的Ted Stevens是美國任職時間最長的國會參議員。
Ted Stevens為共和黨籍，於2008年7月29日被聯邦大陪審團以他並未誠實為財產申報而起訴七項隱瞞收入的不實陳述罪(重罪, Ted Stevens Tuesday on seven counts of filing false financial disclosures.)，這次的指控使他成為1993年以來首位被聯邦大陪審團起訴的國會參議員。
史蒂文斯 Ted Stevens 發表聲明聲稱自己無罪，在2008年9月22日本案開始進入審理程序中的選任陪審員( Jury selection)程序。不過法庭原本預計以3日的時間完成陪審員的選任，但是光是2008年9月23日當天，法官( Judge Emmet Sullivan)已經就哥倫比亞特區中的 45名居民( residents)審查其等是否能於本案審理中公正無偏見( to see if they can be fair and impartial when hearing the case)，卻無法如期完成。
本案美國司法部於2008年7月29日起訴日當天下午舉行記者會，宣布聯邦大陪審團起訴在參院任職達40年的史蒂文斯; 媒體預估史蒂文斯 Ted Stevens 被起訴將進一步影響共和黨2008年11月的大選。目前民主黨在參院以51比49領先共和黨，正在努力爭取60比40的多數，從而使共和黨在國會的拖延戰術失效。
聯邦檢察官表示，從1999年5月至2007年8月，長達8年的時間，Ted Stevens得到阿拉斯加最大石油服務公司VECO及該公司前執行長艾倫（Bill Allen）贈送的價值美金25萬元的禮物和服務，而史蒂文斯並未申報這些收入。(包括：VECO為他大規模裝修一幢度假屋，包括換新地板，設置車庫、圍繞房屋的陽台、管道、電路，提供一個維京牌瓦斯烤箱，配備家具和工具等。Ted Stevens還被控用一輛老舊福特汽車與五千元交換一輛新的路寶（Land Rover）汽車，也未加以申報)。
美國司法部表示，執法部門期待史蒂文斯自己投案，不會逮捕他。

資料來源(Note):
1、2008-07-30世界日報
2、Libby Casey,Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens Goes On Trial,September 22, 2008 · NPR News. Jury selection begins Monday in the trial of Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens. The Republican Party's longest-serving senator faces seven counts of lying on his Senate disclosure forms.
3、http://aprn.org/
4、New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/washington/30stevens.html
5、A copy of the indictment can be found here(聯邦大陪審團的起訴書): http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/washington/20080729stevensindictment.pdf
起訴Ted Stevens的罪名1: 不實陳述罪 False Statments(18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(1))
罪名2-7: 不實陳述罪 False Statments (18 U.S.C. § 1001.(a)(2) )主要是在每一年的財產申報書上(Financial Disclosure Form)針對NO或YES的回答，有所不實。
這跟台灣近期在吵的財產來源不明罪，似乎是不同的。
6、註:我國針對被告的不實陳述(說謊)是沒有處罰的規定的，所以被告不管在警察局、檢察官、法官開庭時如何說謊，縱使被查到，是沒有處罰規定的(很不可思議吧 !)。在美國，被告有權利保持沉默，但是不表示被告可以像台灣被告一樣隨便亂講，在US不管任何人對執法單位說謊，或者就像本案的Ted Stevens一樣，在財產申報表格上不實陳述(填載)都有可能面臨不實陳述罪的指控。
7 自由時報記者施曉光 ,財產來源不明罪 藍委倡追溯, 2008/8/31.""法務部擬妥「貪污治罪條例修正草案」..將增訂第6條之1，規定「公務員違反不明來源財產之說明義務罪」，刑度訂在3年以下。並在第十條增訂第2項，明定公務員不明來源財產視為貪污犯罪所得財物，可依法扣押、沒收、追徵、追繳或抵償。''''

By: WanLi Yang 2008/9/25 Taiwan Tainan

美國司法部長致詞

美國司法部長Alberto Gonzalez的致詞

由於此回是NAAG百年慶，因此美國司法部長Alberto Gonzalez 的演講，即為此回NAAG夏季年會的重頭戲，而當地媒體(例如，The Atlanta Journal-Constitution)也做了相當大幅的報導，NAAG主席Thurbert Baker開場介紹後，Alberto Gonzalez即開始進行其20分中的演講。

Alberto Gonzalez致詞中表示NAAG成立迄今已經一百年，現今時代的任務已經與百年前大為不同，會在其任司法部長所剩18個月期間，針對打擊恐怖份子行動繼續採取相關應對，但是只有利用聯邦的資源是不夠的，希望各州能一起加入打擊恐怖份子的行列。
之於犯罪率問題，他本人也有注意到而且進行相關的訪談，瞭解到美國境內槍枝的取得過於容易是問題的主因之ㄧ，又鑒於Virginia attack事件，(如前述，美國維吉尼亞州剛於四月份發生ㄧ件舉國震驚的韓裔大學生因為不滿遭到排擠而持槍進入校園開槍射殺32位師生後自殺的事件)，該韓裔學生其實早已經開始精神治療而且理論上應該無法購得用以犯案的兩支手槍，但是維吉尼亞州並未將資料這個問題提入由FBI管理用以清查槍枝購買者背景的the National Instant Criminal Background Check System系統[1]當中，而且大部分的州也沒有將相關資訊轉入或提供給上開系統，使得該韓裔學生得以在進行精神治療的情況下仍取得槍枝。這個問題藉由該事件觀之，可瞭解槍支實在過於容易取得且泛濫，現在問題已經不限於單純的槍枝犯罪問題，也包括整體的校園安全以及執法人員執法安全問題。故以，針對此問題的具體措施，將更嚴格限制槍枝武器等的購買方式，例如加強稽查購買者的背景資料等。不過話又說回來，目前僅有23州針對槍枝購買者要求於購買時必須提供個人資料，故以，Alberto Gonzalez呼籲各州檢察總長重視此問題，並讓這個政策能落實於各州 ( state level)。

針對網路安全部分，司法部的政策仍放在查緝兒童性照片以及性侵害案件的查緝上。Alberto Gonzalez表示由於犯罪者藉由網路，十分容易將被害少年少女誘拐出而加以性侵害，而且透過無國界的網路，一接觸到兒童性照片那種影像一般正常人也很難從腦海中將該等影像刪除，其影響性甚大，基於這樣的信念，因此，司法部除一方面將持續起訴張貼下載兒童性照片者，而且查緝將非常主動、處罰將非常嚴厲，絕無灰色地帶；藉此場合呼籲各州檢察總長檢視己州法律，希望藉由合作，可以共同打擊此類型犯罪。另一方面，「預防」也是極為重要的政策，故以，現階段預防政策將不會忽略「教育宣導」。
在緝捕性犯罪者行動上，目前已經有建立一些指導原則以及要求性犯罪者提供住處，希望能有效建置地圖系統(map)供公眾與辦案者瞭解住宅附近有無性犯罪者出入而即早防範。

[1] 法源: the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 (Brady Act), Public Law 103-159. 系統全稱為the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).資料來源：http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/nics/nicsindex.htm


2007.6 NAAG會議
By Wan-Li Yang

criminal procedure and the use of audio-recording

Criminal procedure and the use of audio-recording in Taiwan
- the effects of the new law

1. Background
Electronic recording systems have been installed in every District Prosecutors’ Office for several decades. However, police stations have not been equipped in this way. The movement toward providing recording systems in order to protect the accused gathered strength in the late 1990s. The system protects the public interest by helping to ensure honest and effective law enforcement and also protects the individual interests of police officers wrongfully accused of improper tactics. In 1998, a new criminal procedure amendment came into force. According to Article 100-1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1997, the entire proceedings of interrogation must be audio-recorded, and may also be video-recorded if necessary, in order to protect the human rights of defendants.

2. Regulations
2.1 Constitution of the R.O.C.
2.1.1 Article 8. Personal Freedom
People shall be guaranteed personal freedom. Except in cases of flagrante delicto as provided by law, no person shall be arrested or detained otherwise than by a judicial or police authority in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law.
When a person is arrested or detained on suspicion of having committed a crime, the authority making the arrest or detention shall in writing inform the said person, and his designated relative or friend, of the grounds for his arrest or detention, and shall, within 24 hours, turn him over to a competent court for trial.
2.1.2 Article 24 ( Public Functionary’s Responsibility and Torts Claim)
Any public functionary who, in violation of law, infringes upon the freedom or right of any person shall be held responsible under criminal and civil laws and be subject to disciplinary measures in accordance with law. The injured person may claim compensation from the State for damage sustained.
2.2 Code of Criminal Procedure
Article 100-1 : the recording system
· Paragraph 1 of Article 101-1:
The defendant’s interrogation shall be audio-recorded in full. If necessary, uninterrupted video-recording shall also be made. This, however, shall not apply under exigent conditions as specified in the written transcript.
· Paragraph 2 of Article 101-2:
If any inconsistency exists between the audio or video recording and the written transcript, the inconsistent part of the statement shall not be used as evidence except in special circumstances.
2.3 Other relevant regulations
· Regulations for audio and video recording when police question a suspect. (Announced) 1998/07/02
· Regulations for using and keeping audio and video records made by the police and prosecuting authority. (Announced) 2004/03/03
· Regulations concerning the use of audio recording in court
(Announced) 1990.04.30 (Amended) 2003.06.25
Originally audio recording was used only to protect the human rights of defendants during questioning. Later, the system was expanded to include witness statements in the investigation rooms and the court. According to the "Regulations concerning the use of audio recording in court", a recording shall be made at all civil, criminal and administrative courts when in session.

3. Analysis of judgments
Article 100-1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was revised in 1998. Since then, all written decisions made by judges have been posted on the Internet for public reference. This brochure examines claims of mistreatment made by defendants, whose police station recordings were therefore reviewed by the court. It also evaluates the efficacy of judges’ examination of the above cases for the period 1999 - 2007 in the Kaohsiung D.C.

Kaohsiung D.C. 1999-2007 – number of cases in which the defendant claimed mistreatment by the police and whose interrogation recording was examined, and the number of cases where the defendant was acquitted of prior charges due to inadmissible evidence

-----------------------------------------
no. of cases no.acquitted
1999: 4 1
2000: 13 4
2001: 14 4
2002: 25 4
2003: 30 6
2004: 22 4
2005: 21 2
2006: 41 5
2007: 19 0


-----------------------------------------
Percentage of defendant complaints upheld
1999:25%
2000:30%
2001:18%
2002:16%
2003:20%
2004:18%
2005:9.5%
2006:11.9%
2007:0%
----------------------------------------
Analysis
Data indicates that in cases handled by the Kaohsiung D.C., defendants are increasingly refuting the truth of the written transcripts of their statements on the grounds that these were not made voluntarily. The percentage of such complaints upheld by the judge has fallen steadily. Defendants have become more skillful at taking advantage of procedural defects. Nevertheless, stricter requirements for audio and video recordings during interrogation have resulted in a decline in the number of inadmissible cases.


4. Effects of implementation
4.1 Disadvantages
Audio recording calls for a huge expense of time and manpower. Furthermore, where computers are used to store the recording, problems of maintenance, integration and security problems may arise.

4.2 Advantages
4.2.1 Protecting human rights: Elimination of the use of torture to extract confessions
The prosecution and investigative agencies are required to observe all regulations in making audio or video recordings during an interrogation and go further to protect human rights when they make written records.
4.2.2 Ensuring freedom in making confessions
In Taiwan, as there is no special law to punish false statements made by defendants, retraction of confessions in court is commonplace. A full audio or video recording enables the judge to hear a defendant’s confession in his own words and see his body language, and ensures the defendant’s freedom in making confessions.
4.2.3 Providing the police with a legal basis for action
In Taiwan there is no provision for punishing false statements made by defendants. As a full investigation is required into a defendant's complaint of torture or denial of freedom while making his statement, the prosecutor may appeal to the judge for a stiffer punishment if the defendant is found to have made a false statement.

5. A special system for sexual-assault cases
5.1. Introduction
So that victims of sexual assault do not suffer additional stress during repeated questioning, special regulations governing audio and video recordings have been established.
5.2. Reducing the need for victims of sexual abuse to repeat their statements
Intended applicants:
Victims of sexual abuse who are mentally retarded or are under the age of sixteen.
Other victims who agree to the application and who are found to be in need when interviewed by social workers prior to the interrogation.
Each sexual crime prevention center shall set up a private and friendly interview area, equipped with unobtrusive electronic recording facilities and partitioned with one-way glass walls. This area should also be fitted with a computerized video system. The entire interrogation, which may be directed by a prosecutor through the use of an on-line system, is audio-visually recorded without interruption.
When a special social worker interviews the victim, he must tell the victim the rights provided for in the Criminal Code of Procedure, ask whether he or she is willing to participate in the process, and inform the victim that the whole process will be audio-visually recorded. When preparing the records, the social worker may link to the computer systems of the juvenile court, prosecution, and military prosecution service in order to reduce unnecessary repetition of statements prior to the interrogation.
5.3 Efficacy of implementation
A sexual offense is committed less openly than other offenses and there are rarely witnesses. Victims are often reluctant to come forward with an accusation. Instead, they choose to conceal their suffering rather than go to court. Even when they do take the witness stand, they may keep silent throughout the hearing. There are even cases of suicide in such situations. For these reasons, it is very important to preserve the findings of the preliminary investigation in order to avoid additional suffering and to protect mentally retarded victims and those under 16, who do not have the ability to make complete statements.
This slide examines cases where the judge decided to view video recordings in court. The cases come from the Kaohsiung Juvenile Court for the period 2001 - 2004. In two of the 13 cases, the video recordings convinced the judge that the defendants were not guilty and they were therefore acquitted. In one case, for technical reasons, no video recording was found, so the pre-trial statement was deemed inadmissible. However, the defendant was found guilty on the basis of other evidence. In all the other cases, the defendants were found guilty because the video recordings together with other supporting evidence proved that the statements were admissible.
5.4. A case study from 2002
The defendant drove by a kindergarten and saw three 9-year-old girls playing there. He asked the girls to help him remove some objects from his vehicle. After the girls had been lured inside, he drove them away and forced them to have sexual intercourse and commit obscene acts with him. As the victims were unwilling to appear in court, the judge decided to examine the video recording made at the time of the case.
The verdict
In the verdict, the judge stated: “Examination of the video recording showed that when girl 9104, the most traumatized victim in the case, mentioned how she had been forced to have oral sex and masturbate, she cried out in horror and could not continue. The mother and the girl embraced each other and the scene was very moving. When the girl grows up, all her hopes will disappear and she won’t be able to say a word to others about her suffering.” The judge wrote this paragraph as part of the verdict and, with other supporting evidence, determined that the defendant was guilty.
5.5. Conclusion
A complete video recording may increase the credibility of evidence in cases where the victim is mentally retarded or a child below the age of 16. The foregoing example indicates that when a victim is so mentally retarded or so traumatized that he/she cannot make a statement, or is unwilling to do so, the one made during police investigation is very important, especially if the judge decides that an audio or video recording made outside the court can be used as evidence to determine the existence of a crime, and can make up for the deficiency or lack of a statement by the victim in court.


Overall, following the implementation of audio and video-recording procedures throughout the offices of the police, prosecutors and judges, the level of protection has increased for both defendants and the public.


By Wan-Li Yang 2008/8/8

Age Verification

2007.6NAAG「Age Verification發展可能性」議程

此議程較為特殊，目前僅有康州[1]與喬治亞州有計劃實施，主講人包括有網路教育基金會(Internet Ed Fdn)的主任 Tim Lordan以及Aristotle執行長(CEO) John Phillips, 另外，還包括來自紐約的Ken Dreifach, Sonnenschein Nath 與 Rosenthal。

「Age Verification」乃是基於保護兒童與十八或十六歲以下之少年、網路安全等目的，要求相關網路業者，必須設有Age Verification的相關系統，使兒童與少年能免於遭犯罪者引誘、略誘而遭侵害等，其主要防範的犯罪類型則為性犯罪以及兒童少年接近賭博網站等。例如，康州檢察總長Richard Blumenthal就表示要在今年三月起要求社會網路網站（the social work sites）要設置有Age Verification系統。
一些網站例如MySpace, Facebook以及Xanga將會受到相關規範，規範方式不盡相同，簡單者，例如，少年要上去一些網站，必須向家長拿取密碼才可以上相關網站；如果有少年使用者，少年將需要得到其父母同意才可以將他們的一些側寫的資料(profiles)張貼上網；同時如果要上去小孩的網站也需要家長同意( Parents would also be permitted to access their kid's Web pages.) ，基本上，這些規範的目的在於防止性犯罪者(sexual predators)接近小孩，所以如果有網路業者未遵守相關規範的話，將有可能被罰款最高達五千美金。不過，針對此立意甚佳的法案，仍有特殊技術性問題無法獲得完全的解決；此外，法案是否能達到隔離性犯罪者的效果也是個問題。
與會的各州檢察總長對此議題發言十分踴躍，且提出相當深入的問題，例如，如何區分應該加以規範的網站( the social work sites)，相關措施採取後對市場經濟會產生何等影響，如何辨識遠端使用者為少年或成年人等，更甚者，與會者有質疑表示：有心者仍可以假扮為少年而誘使少年離家，另外還有憲法言論免責權問題、家長責任轉為社會責任、網路公司將成本轉嫁到消費者身上等問題，還有，這Age Verification系統與目前要求網路使用者不要隨便給予個人資料的政策也不盡相符等。有趣的是，演講者表示其實Age Verification系統技術性的問題仍可以獲得某種程度的解決，例如，從一開始的密碼設計，一直到設定相關的問題來測試網路遠端使用者是否為少年等，如果使用者無法回答或者回答的答案與ㄧ般使用狀況有異，再利用紅綠燈方式讓相關網路公司可得以辨識出特殊個案，進而得以採取適當措施。當然啦，經由這些設計，可以做出某程度的辨識技術是不會有問題的，真正有問題的是，這些守法的網路公司會不會因為這Age Verification系統而喪失客戶，客戶將流失到一些不守法的網路公司，造成劣幣驅逐良幣的疑慮；講者就此舉出MySpace公司為例，表示因為有許多的性犯罪者利用其網站作為誘使少年少女的工具，因此，MySpace已經自行開發研究相關的Age Verification系統技術，所以仍是有網路公司自願承擔社會責任的。
[1] TMC net,Connecticut Attorney General Backs Member Age Verification for Social Sites, http://blog.tmcnet.com/regulations/legislation-and-debate/connecticut-attorney-general-backs-member-age-verification-for-social-.asp, March 12, 2007.

2007.7
By Wan-Li Yang

sexual offenders list

2007.6NAAG「打擊性犯罪」議程

Andy Russell則是針對追蹤性掠奪者(Tracking Sexual Predators)政府可能提供的服務與支援進行演講。Andy Russell表示隨著網路的發展，如何有效防範性掠奪者犯罪已經是一個全國性的議題了，但是如何解決此問題呢？他指出，愈早辨識出性掠奪者愈能儘早防範，因此，第一，要建立培養出辨識能力，這點必須從基礎資料進行分析，並借重網路網站強化結果。此外，還要建立一套所謂性犯罪者出沒地圖(Map data/ Sexual Offenders List)。

性犯罪者出沒地圖，乃是藉由性犯罪者必須向各州相關單位註冊的規範，在犯罪者註冊後將資料彙整上網，結合 resident map的功能，讓公眾可以透過網路查悉自己住宅附近有無此等性犯罪者出沒[1]。因此，如果有性犯罪者的住所出現在學區附近時，即可以即早辨識出高再犯可能性者(the potential offender)並研擬相關對策，例如由執法人員加強查訪等。再者，如果這些性犯罪者被發現沒有實際居住在其提供的居住地時，也可以藉由上開map追蹤發現，甚至利用map去發現其現所在地，而採取相關措施。

但是就這個立意甚佳的計畫，因為各區各州的規範、登記方式均不盡相同，還必須面臨各區資料如何進行整合的問題。
[1]參http://www.floridasexualpredator.com/, Florida Sexual Predators利用了FDLE的資料以及Google Map的系統所組合而成。

2007.7
By Wan-Li Yang

貸款詐欺議程 Mortgage Fraud

2007.6 NAAG「貸款詐欺議程」(Mortgage Fraud)

由 喬治亞州聯邦檢察官(U.S. Attorney, ND GA)David Nahmias,以及喬治亞州資深聯邦助理檢察官(Senior AAG, GA) David McLaughlin主講，主題全稱為「保護美國夢:將貸款詐欺從社區中驅離」( Protecting The American Dream: Driving Mortgage Fraud From Your Communities)。

美國貸款詐欺問題愈來愈嚴重，而且有逐漸攀升情形，目前甚至已經有職業犯罪者專門從事此等犯罪。講者表示分析去年(2006年)的貸款詐欺類型，其中有百分之45是屬於房屋貸款詐欺，另外有百分之20則與房屋貸款詐欺有關的詐欺案件，因此就此趨勢以及比例，當政者必須注意下列問題:
第一，防止成為被害人；退休老人為首要的宣導對象。
第二，分析貸款與犯罪間關係。
第三，必須呼籲民眾從另一個角度思考問題。例如，告訴民眾縱使房屋等不動產價值翻升兩倍(虛增不動產價格而提高貸款額度)，但是同時間必須繳納的稅金也會提高、轉手賣出也更加不易，請民眾多方面思考，防止一般民眾成為受害者或者進而成為犯罪者。

另外，貸款詐欺案件在喬治亞州去年增加了百分之5，因此如何去定義「貸款詐欺」也是喬治亞州當前最重要的問題。是以，喬治亞州一開始想要針對貸款詐欺案件加以處理時，聯邦檢察官辦公室即鎖定損失最慘重的被害案件，也就是將資源放在損失最嚴重的案件中，開始加以偵查，成效不錯。並鼓勵各州仿效這種選案方式，因為損失最慘重的案件較無爭議性，同時也可以顧及起訴效率問題(不能拖延太晚起訴)。例如其檢察官辦公室針對一件大型的貸款詐欺案件，經過三年的調查以及18個月的審理期間後，終於將這個涉及五十棟房屋的詐貸案件共犯集團繩之以法，不過他也指出，這個案件考驗了1.檢察官辦公室的辦案資源與能力(州檢察官辦公室一般而言較之聯邦檢察官更無資源，整理辦公環境也不如聯邦檢察官理想)、2.難以具體整理歸納出犯罪模式，3.更難如普通案件一般容易證明犯罪，4.何況這類型的案件還涉及了複雜的商業房屋仲介業者在內，因此4.如何整合各執法單位，也再三考驗了檢察官辦公室的能力。

2006年喬治亞州的貸款詐欺案件排行全美第四，而佛羅里達州則位居全美之冠，目前喬治亞州政府已經簽署了全美第一份the Mortgage Fraud Crime Act，佛羅里達州則是第二。這代表已經有一些州開始瞭解且重視貸款詐欺的案件。不過，如果州開始採取動作，那麼地方執法人員，包括警察在內都必須開始進行相關訓練。

2007.7
BY Wan-Li Yang

Pink Sheets Stock 粉單市場2 OTC Compliance Unit 審查標準

申請報價程序
1.申請公司要有一個 Market makers (下簡稱MM，起市人、造市人)對其進行推薦，並填寫Form 211表格；或2.符合Rule 15c2-11 豁免(Exemption)之規定，填寫豁免表(Exemption Form)。 Market makers 於公開報價的前三天，須向「全美證券商協會」之OTC主管單位(The NASD OTC Compliance Unit)提出一份Form 211正本及有關發行資訊的影印本兩份。當完成上述之許可程序，Nasdaq之「Nasdaq市場資料庫系統」(Nasdaq Market Data Integrity)將會通知該MM，其已完成某一證券之登錄，並即可開始輸入報價。
( 下載:PDF OTC_BullBoard_Form 211 表格)

OTC Compliance Unit審查項目
OTC Compliance Unit會審查甚麼?
由於申請粉單市場報價，非如一般美國上市規則那麼嚴格，申請後，OTC Compliance Unit約於10天左右(或更快)回文，一般而言，申請不需要繳交財報給美國SEC( filing financial statements )，更不用提出經會計師查核的財報( audited financial statements)，不過，要注意的是這個看似簡單的遊戲規則，並不適用於美國以外的公司，換言之，外國公司打算利用Pink Sheets Stock粉單市場進行報價，還是需要符合一定的標準。例如，會見到NASD要求更進一步的公司交易安全性說明、提供更多的文件資料、財務狀況、股東名冊(含名稱、地址、發行日，總人數)、股東名冊正確性說明、專利商標狀況、是否與上市公司有關、CEO的disciplinary history。

縱使公司將資料提供出去之後，有些時候會經過三、四個月審查，再告訴你下列狀況:
1.審查所有股東名冊、股票、股東地址後，發現這些股票都不是經過股務經紀人( the transfer agent，或稱過戶代理人、股票經紀人)印製的股票。
2.看不出來普通股、特別股，或者關係公司、控股公司間的關係。
3.要提供圖表( schematic diagram )說明mergers或share issuances
4.進一步要求說明CEO何時、以何方式來營運
5.列出所有的下列人員: officers, directors, principal shareholders
6.股東會議紀錄等。

之後，如果OTC Compliance Unit認為仍有不足，還會再根據NASD Rule 6640再次要求:
1.一直到申請日前不少於六個月內之財務報告，且經相關查核者。
2.與關係企業的細部描述，含控股公司持股總數、人數、控股方式 等。
3.持股比例。
4.發行股票種類的細部描述(例如 Preferred Stock優先股、特別股的分派條件等，股票持有人的國籍、募資方式)。
5.證明所提出申請資訊、資料之正確性。
6.甚至提交所有名單後，會再回函表示因為實際控股人次少於一定標準，屬於SEC Release 41110裡面的紅旗 red flag容易遭操控，所以可疑有pump and dump之虞，請進一步提出說明。

所以雖然無法到美國上市、上櫃，也可以透過這類報價系統進行，但須注意的是Pink Sheets 根本不是證券交易所 (The Pink Sheets is not a stock exchange. ) Pink Sheets Stock粉單市場報價標準看似遠比上市櫃公司低，實際上也不易申請。

相關網站(資料來源):1. Otcbb.com Information Center
2. NASD Rule 6640: http://finra.complinet.com/finra/display/display.html?rbid=1189&element_id=1159000871
3. http://itsecnews.blogspot.com/2007/04/pump-and-dump.html"Pump and dump"這是美國投資界的用語，原本是指少數證券分析師廉價購入股票，接著在報紙文章和電視或電台廣播中, blog, internet 吹捧他們手中的股票 (當然別人不知道他們買了這些股票) 來拉抬股價 (這個動作叫做 pump)，然後在股價上揚時賣出持股 (叫做 dump)，但現在則指任何人為的炒作行為。
4.進入粉單市場: http://www.pinksheets.com/ 可查詢粉市報價行情(嚴格稱，非股市行情) 先行市場分析、市場調查。
5.美國國際商會/美國國際商務會員中心-在美國上市/買殼上市

2008.7.20 0:16 A.M.
at office
By Wan-Li Yang

Pink Sheets Stock粉單交易市場筆記

Pink Sheets Stock 粉單市場(粉單交易市場)閱讀筆記

美國對於未達上市(櫃)標準之公開發行公司，在既有之上市、上櫃證券市場之外，另建立一未上市、未上櫃的報價系統，使該等公司亦能有一合法便利之籌資場所。

美國於1990年在店頭市場下設立「佈告欄股票市場」(Over-the-counter Bulletin Board；簡稱 OTC Bulletin Board, 或OTCBB,亦稱場外股票的報價指示)以提供未上市(櫃)之報價。

OTCBB之沿革:
OTCBB於1990年6月成立，成立之初為一實驗性市場，目的係為在現行的店頭市場中另建立一交易市場提供未上市(櫃)公司報價，以健全店頭市場，並使未上市(櫃)股票報價透明化。依據「1990年潘尼股票改革法」(Penny Stock Reform Act of 1990)授權美國「證券交易委員會」 (SEC)建立一個符合1934年證券交易法第17B規定之電子系統，以協助公開報價及顯示最近成交價資訊。
1998.4 OTCBB在修正相關制度後，經SEC准脫離實驗階段成為一個常態性市場，並允許在SEC註冊的所有美國國外證券及「美國存託憑證」可在OTCBB顯示即時報價、最近成交價格與交易量資訊。

三、OTCBB之發行制度
(一)報價資格
OTCBB主要為提供無法正式在美國上市上櫃的公司能有合法、良好之交易市場，以藉此提高該公司股票之流通性及知名度，故對於申請報價的公司在設立年限與財務狀況並無要求須達一定標準。
雖然OTCBB並無任何申請門檻限制，但所有欲在OTCBB報價之證券必須由至少一位以上之「市場創造者」(Market Maker，以下簡稱MM)推薦。
而此所謂的MM，是指在OTCBB交易之自營商，其必須是「全美證券商協會」 (National Association Securities Dealers)之會員，且符合「全美證券商協會」對證券自營商所要求之財務與業務經營之規定，並具有Nasdaq第二代工作站設備，及符合1934年證券交易法Rule 15c2-11之規定，即可擔任OTCBB的MM。

(二)報價證券之規定
目前於OTCBB報價之證券主要為美國國內權益證券、國外權益證券及「美國存託憑證」(American Depository Receipt)。欲在OTCBB報價之證券除必須遵守「OTCBB合格規定」外，尚須符合下列之條件：
1.美國國內權益證券，其必須是：(1)未在美國全國性證券交易所與Nasdaq市場掛牌之證券。而美國目前經SEC核准設立之全國性證券交易所計有美國證券交易所(American Stock Exchange)、紐約證券交易所(New York Stock Exchange)等二個全國性證券交易所，基本上只要其非在該二個交易所與Nasdaq市場掛牌之證券，均可在OTCBB掛牌交易；或(2)在美國各地區區域性證券交易所上市或交易的證券；或(3)因未符合Nasdaq市場上櫃標準而遭到下市之證券；或(4)經「市場創造者」填妥Form 15c2-11豁免表格後之「粉紅單交易系統」 (Pink Sheet)報價之證券；或(5)從紐約證券交易所或美國證券交易所下市者；或(6)在紐約證券交易所或美國證券交易所暫停交易者或
2.國外權益證券或「美國存託憑證」，其必須是： (1) 未在美國全國性證券交易所與Nasdaq市場掛牌；或(2)在區域性證券交易所掛牌買賣者；或(3)從紐約證券交易所或美國證券交易所下市者；或(4)在紐約證券交易所或美國證券交易所暫停交易者。

(三)報價證券之等級
依據MM參與報價之程度，於OTCBB報價之證券可分為不適任證券、適任證券與活絡證券三種等級。
1.不適任證券(Ineligible Securities)：所有目前尚未於OTCBB報價之OTC證券均被視為是不適任證券。此不適任證券必須有市場創造者提出一份Form 211或一份15c2-11的豁免表格(15c2-ll Exemption Form)，在經過OTC主管單位核可後，該證券才具備「適任的」(eligible)地位。

2.適任證券(Eligible Securities)：若某一證券屬於適任證券，即表示有一個或一個以上的MM取得許可，能夠於取得許可後的30日內在OTCBB系統上對該證券進行報價。任何其他的MM若欲對該證券進行報價時，則必須填寫一份完整的Form 211。

3.活絡證券(Active Securities)：「全美證券商協會」對於適任證券於其30天的適任期間內，將會對該適任證券實施「經常性報價測試」 (a frequency-of-quotation test)，以確認該適任證券之交易是否活絡。此所謂「經常性報價測試」為經紀商或自營商在30日的適任期間內，是否對一適任證券在自營商間的報價系統上進行公開報價，並至少有12個交易日，且沒有連續四個交易日以上未進行報價。如果通過此測試，則該適任證券即被認可為活絡證券，任何的MM可適用Rule 15c2-11豁免規定，能自由參與報價而無須預先填寫Form 211。然如果未通過此測試，則此所謂「經常性報價測試」為經紀商或自營商在三十天的適任期間內，是否對一適任證券在自營商間的報價系統上，進行公開報價，並至少有十二個交易日，且沒有連續四個交易日以上未進行報價。若符合此一標準，則該適任證券即被認可為活絡證券，任何的「市場創造者」可適用Rule 15c2-11豁免規定，能自由參與報價而無須預先填寫Form 211。

(四)申請報價程序
1.發行公司有一MM對其進行推薦，並填寫Form 211表格；或
2.符合Rule 15c2-11 豁免(Exemption)之規定，填寫豁免表(Exemption Form)。MM於公開報價的前三天，須向「全美證券商協會」之OTC主管單位(The NASD OTC Compliance Unit)提出一份Form 211正本及有關發行資訊的影印本兩份。當完成上述之許可程序，Nasdaq之「Nasdaq市場資料庫系統」(Nasdaq Market Data Integrity)將會通知該MM，其已完成某一證券之登錄，並即可開始輸入報價。
( 下載:PDF OTC_BullBoard_Form 211 表格)申請後，OTC Compliance Unit約於10天左右(或更快)回文，會見到NASD要求更進一步的公司交易安全性說明、提供更多的文件資料、財務狀況、股東名冊(含名稱、地址、發行日)、股東名冊正確性說明、專利商標狀況、是否與上市公司有關、CEO的disciplinary history。所以，報價標準雖然遠比上市櫃公司低，實際上也不是很容易申請。

(五)維持交易規定
OTCBB對於報價交易之發行公司並無最少掛牌股數要求，但若欲維持在OTCBB交易，必須至少要有一MM對其進行報價並符合「OTCBB合格規定」(The OTCBB Eligibility Rule)。「OTCBB合格規定」係於1999.1.4經SEC核准實施，要求凡是於OTCBB報價之證券須向SEC、往來銀行或保險機構揭露其財務資訊，並將此資訊經由「電子資料收集、分析及查詢系統」 (Electronic Data Gathering , Analysis and Retrieval；EDGAR))向投資大眾公開。並要求在1999.1.4前已在OTCBB報價而尚未揭示訊息之公司的股票，以一年的緩衝期進行調整，自2000.7.1起所有在OTCBB報價交易的公司，必須逐步完全揭露當前的財務資訊以符合「OTCBB合格規定」。

四、OTCBB之交易制度
特色即是由MM參與。
MM在證券市場上的主要工作，在於以自營商身份自行買賣相關之有價證券，使市場交易可以順利進行。MM藉由在OTCBB報價系統上分別揭示某一股票欲買進的買進報價(bid)及欲賣出的賣出報價(ask)兩種價位，以揭示的價格進行交易，以活絡市場之交易。

交易方式：
(一)報價方式
MM報價之方式有兩種：1.確定報價(priced)：可以採只報買價、只報賣價的單邊報價方式，或買、賣價均報的雙邊報價方式；2.不確定報價(unpriced)：即採不定明價格，僅表示買賣之意願，而徵求買方回報其欲買入之價格(bid wanted)或賣方回報其欲賣出價格(offer wanted)，藉以吸引賣單或買單。

(二)報價單位
在報價申報數量上，OTCBB對報價設有最小報價單位之規定，因此MM的報價單位須滿足某一最低數量的要求。SEC於2000.9.5核准「全美證券商協會」Rule 6750的修正案，將OTCBB報價中每股超過美金200元以上之最低報價數量，由舊有之五個級距，多增加區分四個級距，而成為九個級距。

(三)交易成本
於OTCBB報價之發行公司無須繳交費用給MM，但MM須依據每月平均部位(positions)數向OTCBB繳交費用。由於「市場創造者」只要於系統上報價一次即稱為一個部位，因此每月MM預向OTCBB繳交之系統費用，係將當月報價次數之總和，除以當月交易天數得出當月平均部位數，再將計算出的當月平均部位數乘上一部位六美元費用，即為MM之成本。


五、資訊揭露與監視制度
(一)資訊揭露方式
1.市場交易資訊揭露
OTCBB經由「市場資訊商」 (Market Data Vendor)的終端機與全球資訊網站(Web Sites)，向全球的客戶揭示下列資訊：
(1)美國國內證券、國外證券及「美國存託憑證」最新成交價與成交量資訊；
(2)「直接參與計畫」每日最高價、最低價、收盤價以及成交量資訊；
(3)個別MM的買價、賣價以及股份數(indications of interest)之報價資訊；
(4)證券商間對於美國國內證券、國外證券及「美國存託憑證」的內部報價(inside quotes)；
(5)「直接參與計畫」的試探性報價；
(6)MM的電話號碼。所有訂購使用Nasdaq第二代工作站的公司以及MM，皆能夠在其工作站上看到所有OTCBB的資訊而無須額外付費。

2.公司資訊揭露
於OTCBB報價之發行公司無須向主管機關「全美證券商協會」或其子公司The Nasdaq Stock Market公司繳送任何報告，但其推薦證券商須檢送由發行公司編制的定期性財務報告給SEC或其他的管理單位。

因在OTCBB報價交易僅須一MM推薦即可，因此其投資風險相對較上市、上櫃公司為高，故SEC要求在OTCBB報價交易的公司亦應充分揭露其資訊，以保障投資大眾，並有助於市場規模之擴大。
資料來源:
1.林江峰、陳怡如,美國未上市(櫃)股票交易制度之簡析
2.SEC
3.美國商會
4.Pink Sheets - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
5.NASD Rules: NASD Manual
6.OTCBB有關的法規: http://www.otcbb.com/AboutOTCBB/rulesindex.stm

WANLI YANG
2008.7.19

Guantanamo Bay News

Guantanamo Bay News

美國聯邦最高法院上個月在華盛頓DC判決認定Guantanamo Bay的人犯( Enemy Combatants)享有憲法保障之權利後，目前已經有數百位律師準備好要代表這些人犯展開訴訟了。以往這些案件都在相關軍事法庭審理，一般法院無法審理這些案件，也將因此判決而有不同，該聯邦最高法院
判決認為人犯就其囚禁問題，可以在美國一般法院裡面提出相關之訴訟。

以往律師因為都必須聘請翻譯人員、長時間工作，以及長途飛行前往古巴該基地進行訴訟，因此鮮少有律師願意承接這類案件，故以 Guantanamo Bay Bar Association都必須靠募款來進行，所以相對於2002開始時根本沒有律師願意接這種案件的情形，將在聯邦最高法院判決後做大幅改變，目前對大型律師事務所而言，巨額利益可期，因此各大律師事務所都開始擠著要代表這些人犯了。

911之後，NGOs組織約只有5位律師，目前這些組織人力都是原來的三倍了。

同時間，美國司法部( DOJ )也開始準備增加人力開始應戰，從目前僅有5位檢察官處理Guantanamo Bay人犯案件的情形，DOJ已經打算增加該部門人力至50位了。

專家認為DOJ突然間面對這個判決，突如而來的情形，如果每個訴訟都有律師代表人犯，因為可預期會有很多的案件、大量的 motion，DOJ可能無法如以往一般聘請 Private lawyers來代表政府打這些訴訟，DOJ如何面對這種情形，恐怕是一個非常大的挑戰。

PS:美國最高法院2008年6月12日( United States Supreme Court )在 Boumediene v. Bush 案件中，認為 Guantanamo Bay裡面的人犯( "enemy combatants")，享有憲法保障( captives were entitled to the protection of the United States Constitution)，該案以5比4，而由 Anthony Kennedy大法官代表同意意見之法官表示CSR軍事法庭( the CSR Tribunals)不適當( "inadequate"不適格)。

資料來源: Ari Shapiro, Guantanamo: Calling All Lawyers, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92426959, reviewed 11/7/2008.

July 10, 2008 · When the Supreme Court ruled that detainees at Guantanamo Bay have constitutional rights, an already massive litigation effort grew even larger. Defense attorneys and government lawyers are preparing for a huge volume of work.

News of Guantanamo Bay Bar Association: http://nymag.com/news/features/17337/

Prisoners held as “enemy combatants” at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba can immediately file habeas corpus petitions in US district courts challenging the legality of their confinement.

By Wan-Li Yang
11/7/2008

Taiwan Forfeiture Procedure

The Challenge of Taiwan Forfeiture Procedure
Background

Financial crime is growing problem in Taiwan. To divest such criminals of their ill-gotten gains is one of our main goals and one method of reducing the incentive to carry our these financial crime.
In Taiwan, statutes provide at least two ways, non-judicial and judicial, to implement the forfeiture procedure. For example, customs officers have the authority to forfeit the illegal or smuggled products at the border and prosecutor office won't be involved. On the other hand, once the case involves judicial procedure, either criminal or civil action is available to prosecutors.

It is common for weapon and illegal drugs to be confiscated through criminal procedure. Once the prosecutor can prove a connection between the criminal and property, and once the defendant has been convicted, weapons, illegal drugs and even means of transport are usually forfeited following the written judgment. The law enforcement division of each district prosecutors' office is responsible for enforcing the written judgment. This is the traditional way to deal with property which has been illegally gained or used by the criminals. However, it is insufficient to meet the challenge of changing financial world situation, let alone investigation and confiscated property which had been hidden abroad. For example, in Taiwan little real estate has been forfeited through criminal procedure, and few civil cases has been filed to confiscate the relevant real estate. This is why the authority is eager to see how the procedure works in practice in the foreign stage

In practice, for example, in Taiwan a criminal conviction in which the defendant had been charged and confiscation has been requested requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The criminal confiscation process requires a person must already have been charged with an offence. Upon written conviction, the law enforcement division applies for a permanent confiscation of the property derived from the offence concerned.

In Taiwan, immunity is not allowed in criminal procedure. However, at the pretrial stage dismissal, deferral, plea bargaining and suspended prosecution are all available to the prosecutor. These have served the prosecution well in traditional crime. However, in economic crime, especially that involving public companies, it is rare for plea bargaining to be used, let alone the granting of immunity. Would this affects confiscation of property?

Cases of forfeiture of contraband money: http://jirs.judicial.gov.tw/

Chinese Version
背景
經濟犯罪目前在台灣是一個逐漸攀升的問題。而追討犯罪所得是我們用以降低經濟犯罪動機的主要目標之ㄧ。臺灣相關法律至少提供了兩種執行沒收程序的管道，非司法措施與司法措施等。例如海關可以沒入非法或走私進口的產品，這類情形檢察官就不會參與。另一方面，一旦涉及司法程序，也有刑事與民事措施可以供檢察官利用。

透過刑事訴訟系統進行兇器與毒品等之沒收，在台灣甚為常見。 一旦檢察官可以證明犯罪行為人與財產間之關連性，而被告也被定罪，犯案工具、毒品，甚至交通工具都可以在刑事判決中加以宣告沒收。而刑事執行部門(執行科)就負責來執行這些確定判決。這是傳統處理犯罪所得之作法。然而，這些做法目前已經不足以應付巨變中的全球化財務金融狀況，更遑論必須調查以及沒收被藏放在國境外的犯罪所得財產。因此就不動產而言，甚少見到在刑事判決中被加以沒收者，更少見利用民事途徑來追討此類有關不動產的犯罪所得。 因此，這也就是為何我們迫切想要知道國際間就此問題的實踐方式以及相關執行程序。

在台灣被告的刑事判決除了犯罪行為被起訴外，另外合併請求宣告沒收等，均由檢察官證明無合理可疑。因此就刑事沒收而言，被告必須被起訴。因此基於書面判決，刑事執行部門(執行科)才能進行最終的沒收程序。

在台灣刑事程序中並無所謂的豁免制度，但是在偵查階段，處分、職權處分、緩起訴與認罪協商都可以利用，就傳統犯罪而言這些相關措施已經十分充足。然則，就財產犯罪，尤其是涉及公開發行的上市公司，就甚少行認罪協商的情形，更遑論豁免程序。

澳洲:CONFISCATION OF CRIMINAL ASSETS ACT 2003 Australia

2008.7.11
By Wan-Li Yang

Myanmar News

Taiwanese Religious Leader Went Myanmar


TAIPEI, TAIWAN: A Taiwanese Buddhist leader said Friday (9 May) that Myanmar was promptly dispatching food and medical materials to cyclone survivors even though the reclusive country has been slow to let foreign aid workers in.
Master Hsin Tao made the comments as he returned from a trip to Yangon to assess the destruction from Cyclone Nargis.
He led a team of 10 Taiwanese aid workers to Myanmar this week and dispatched 6 tons of food to cyclone survivors.
Myanmar, also known as Burma, has come in for heavy criticism from the international community for failing to take full advantage of food and other aid it has been offered.
On Friday, spokesman Paul Risley of the World Food Program said "the frustration caused by what appears to be a paperwork delay is unprecedented in modern humanitarian relief efforts."
But Hsin Tao said Myanmar's military rulers have mobilized soldiers and civilians to transport aid materials by ships or helicopters to the cyclone victims spread out along the country's west coast.


Myanmar news from: http://www.mysinchew.com/node/11255?tid=37
Photo released from first apple news:
http://1-apple.com.tw/index.cfm
news:http://1-apple.com.tw/index.cfm?Fuseaction=Article&Sec_ID=3&ShowDate=20080511&IssueID=20080511&art_id=30538685&NewsType=1&SubSec=11
According to the news, Taiwanese Buddhist leaders try to send aid materials by religion tie.

District Prosecutors' Offices in Taiwan

各地方法院檢察署網站 (英文網站佳者*)

Shihlin District Prosecutors' Office
http://www.slc.moj.gov.tw/mp010.html
Location:
http://www.slc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=92261&ctNode=19780&mp=104

Keelung District Prosecutors' Office
http://www.klc.moj.gov.tw/mp026.html
Location:
http://www.klc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=5541&ctNode=11239&mp=120


Miaoli District Prosecutors' Office:
http://www.mlc.moj.gov.tw/mp014.html
Location:
http://www.mlc.moj.gov.tw/mp108.html
Miaoli County (Miaoli Taiwan) is famous for woodcarving and Hakka culture.

Changhua District Prosecutors’ Office
http://www.chc.moj.gov.tw/mp016.html
Location:
http://www.chc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=64058&CtNode=16361&mp=110

Kinmen District Prosecutors' Office
http://www.kmc.moj.gov.tw/mp028.html
Location:
http://www.kmc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=77490&CtNode=18456&mp=122

Kinmen County is famous for it's Kinmen Kaoliang and Kinmen Knife.

Penghu District Prosecutors’ Office
http://www.phc.moj.gov.tw/mp027.html
Location:
http://www.phc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=4343&CtNode=10976&mp=121

Yunlin District Prosecutors' Office
http://www.ulc.moj.gov.tw/mp018.html
Location:
http://www.ulc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=65623&CtNode=16655&mp=112

Tainan District Prosecutors' Office (-)
Tainan District Prosecutors' Office

Taichung District Prosecutor's Office (*)
http://www.tcc.moj.gov.tw/mp109.html

Wanli Yang
2009.2.4 rewrited

the Attorney General of ROC (Taiwan)

The Attorney General of ROC( Taiwan)
The Attorney General of ROC is the chief of both the Supreme Court Prosecutors’ office(Attorney General Office) and prosecution system as a whole.
All public prosecutors are under the direction and supervision by the Attorney General.

Qualifications required to be an Attorney General
According to the law, the Attorney General should has at least one of the following qualifications to be nominated as a candidate.
1. has served any periord as
i. Grand Justice
ii. the president of the Supreme Court
iii. the president of the Administration Court
iv. the chairman of Committee on the Discipline of Public Functionaries. (the chairman of Public Ethic Committee )
2. has served for five years as
i. Judge of the Supreme Court
ii. prosecutor of the Supreme Court Prosecutors'office (Attorney General Office)
iii. the President of High Court
iv. the President of High Court Prosecutors’ Office
3. has served for ten years as
i. Judge
ii. Prosecutor
In practice, the Attorney General always nominated from the Supreme Court Prosecutors’ Office.

Appointment and Tenure of Office
According to the law, Attorney General is specially nominated by the President of ROC(Taiwan) and must be approved by the Legislative Yuan. For historical background to prevent the unwanted political-influence, the Legislative Yuan passed the law to create a tenure system for the Attorney General in 2006, The tenure is four years and only one term can be served.
Chen Tsung-ming is the first ever Attorney General(Prosecutor General) of the ROC nominated under this new four years tenure. His counterpart in the US would be the Federal Attorney General. However, unlike in US, the Attorney General is not considerate a classical part of Administration, therefore required great impartiality in order to maintain the independence of the prosecution system demanded by the public, as well as carries with it enormous responsibility.

The Supreme Court Prosecutors' Office:
http://www.tps.moj.gov.tw/mp002.html
No.235, Sec. 1, Guiyang St.（Gueiyang St）, Zhongzheng District, Taipei City 100, Taiwan (R.O.C.)
10048
Tel: +886-2-2316-7000

Business Hours:
8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Directions: (map of Taiwan maps.google.com.tw)
Link:


Wanli Yang 2008/05/01