Relevant Legal Provisions

Article 184, Paragraph 1 of the Civil Code：A person who, intentionally or negligently, unlawfully infringes upon the rights of another shall be liable for damages. The same applies where a person intentionally causes damage to another in a manner contrary to public order or good morals.

Article 185 of the Civil Code：Where several persons have jointly unlawfully infringed upon the rights of another, they shall be jointly and severally liable for damages. The same applies where it is impossible to determine which of them caused the damage. Instigators and aiders shall be deemed joint tortfeasors.

Facts and Reasons

The defendant was aware that, when an ordinary person obtains and uses another person’s financial institution account, such conduct is often closely related to property crimes. The defendant also knew that the purpose of obtaining another person's account is generally to receive illicit proceeds, conceal criminal activity, and evade investigation.

Nevertheless, with an uncertain intent to aid fraud and money laundering, the defendant contacted an unidentified person of unknown real name, age, and background through the messaging application LINE. The defendant agreed that, by providing account information and the online banking password, the defendant would be able to obtain a loan of NT$200,000.

After the members of the fraud syndicate obtained the account information, they deceived the plaintiff, namely the client represented by this firm, by falsely claiming that the plaintiff could profit through deposit operations. As a result, the plaintiff was misled and remitted several hundred thousand New Taiwan Dollars into the defendant's account.

The funds were then immediately used by members of the fraud syndicate to purchase virtual currency, thereby creating a break in the money flow and making it impossible to trace the whereabouts of the criminal proceeds. This conduct concealed or disguised the criminal proceeds, causing the plaintiff to suffer damage.

Accordingly, based on the legal relationship of tort liability, the plaintiff sought compensation from the defendant for the above damages.
 

Judgment

In the criminal fraud case involving the defendant, the plaintiff filed a criminal incidental civil action seeking damages based on tort liability. The court held that the defendant shall pay the plaintiff the relevant amount of compensation, together with interest calculated at the rate of 5% per annum until full payment is made.

The defendant's conduct had already been adjudicated by the criminal division of the court, which found the defendant guilty of aiding money laundering and sentenced the defendant to three months of imprisonment. The judgment had become final.

Although the defendant did not deny having provided the account at issue, the defendant raised certain arguments in defense. However, the court found that, in addition to providing the account, the defendant also provided the password, which was sufficient for the fraud syndicate members to use the account and therefore constituted aiding fraud.

As for the defendant's assertion that there were no assets available for attachment, the court held that this was an issue concerning whether compensation could actually be recovered, and did not affect the establishment of the defendant's tort liability. The court therefore found the plaintiff's claims to be true.

The court further held that, although the defendant did not personally carry out the fraudulent deception against the plaintiff, the defendant's act of providing the account constituted an aiding act. Under Article 185 of the Civil Code, the defendant and the other members of the fraud syndicate who committed the fraud jointly and unlawfully infringed upon the plaintiff's property rights, and were therefore joint tortfeasors.

Accordingly, the defendant shall be jointly and severally liable with the members of the fraud syndicate for the damages suffered by the plaintiff. The court also found that there was adequate causation between the defendant's conduct and the plaintiff's damage.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for damages against the defendant based on tort liability was well-founded.

(Note: To protect the client's interests, certain case details and judgment images have been redacted and modified. For a full review of the case, please refer to  Judicial Yuan's judgment database)

Attorneys：Ian Yan