商品名稱

[Foreigner in Taiwan secretly filmed case was not prosecuted] A foreigner was charged with illegal s

1. Case Background

The client’s wife, a foreign national, had been voluntarily teaching traditional dances from her home country in Taiwan. Last year, a Taiwanese woman who attended the classes became closer to the couple and once stayed overnight at their residence.

On one occasion, while taking a shower, the student mistakenly believed she saw the client holding a phone outside the bathroom window, suspecting him of filming her. She considered this a form of sexual harassment and reported the incident to the Social Affairs Bureau. Based on her report, the Sexual Harassment Prevention Committee concluded that harassment had occurred and imposed a disciplinary decision.

In reality, the area outside the bathroom was used for storage, and at the time of the incident, the client was merely sorting out the trash—there was no act of filming. Moreover, the louvered window design allowed visibility only from the inside looking out, making it impossible to see into the bathroom from outside.

The Bureau's decision was mainly based on verbal testimonies from the student and her friend, as well as a conversation between the student and the client’s wife. No concrete or physical evidence was provided.

Additionally, both the client and his wife are foreign nationals who do not speak or understand Chinese. The client attempted to submit a written statement during police questioning, but due to the lack of translation assistance, he could not confirm the accuracy of the process. The language barrier made it difficult for him to fully express himself during the investigation. Concerned that this would prevent him from defending himself properly, the client urgently sought legal support from Attorney Chien-Sheng, who is known for full English communication and expertise in criminal defense.

2. Legal Strategy & Resolution

(1) The client first accessed Chien-Sheng International Law Office’s online consultation platform, where he described his situation and booked an appointment with Attorney Saint-Chieh Wang.
(2) During the meeting, Attorney Wang reassured the anxious client, carefully listened to his account of the events, and explained previous successful cases and the firm's approach.
(3) After thoughtful consideration, the client officially retained Chien-Sheng International Law Office. Attorney Wang immediately devised a litigation strategy and partnered with Attorney Hung-Ju Shen to handle the case together.
(4) In court, the defense argued that the disciplinary procedure was unfair and that the evidence was insufficient, demanding that the original decision be revoked. The key points were:

♦ Procedural Violation: No Opportunity for the Client to Explain

The Committee never notified the client for an interview, yet still used an alleged "interview record" as a basis for the ruling. This clearly violated Article 15, Paragraph 3 of the Sexual Harassment Prevention Act, which guarantees the right to explanation and defense. Furthermore, the Committee did not provide the messages or translations submitted by the other party, leaving the client unaware of the exact allegations and unable to respond.

♦ Ambiguous Evidence & Questionable Translation

The accuser admitted that her interpretation was based only on the “tone” of a conversation between the client and his wife, which is far from concrete evidence. The translated chat logs used were never verified by the client. The same translation issues had already caused problems during police questioning, yet the Committee relied on these flawed translations as evidence, making the basis of their decision highly unreliable.

♦ Failure to Investigate Exculpatory Evidence

The client submitted photos showing the layout of his residence, proving that the bathroom window was securely locked from the inside and not visible from outside. The balcony area was cluttered with items and a large washing machine, making secret filming physically implausible. More importantly, the alleged victim previously claimed to suspect filming but continued to stay over and maintain friendly relations with the couple—behavior that contradicts her later accusations.

♦ One-Sided Conclusion Lacking Fairness

The Social Affairs Bureau appeared to have accepted only the accuser’s statements while disregarding favorable evidence provided by the client. This led to a clearly biased conclusion, lacking fairness and objectivity. The disciplinary decision should be revoked and reinvestigated to ensure due process and justice for the client.

3. Final Outcome

Through full English communication, Chien-Sheng attorneys quickly identified the core issues of the case, organized compelling evidence, and presented a clear and strong defense. As a result, they successfully cleared the misunderstanding and secured a “non-prosecution decision”—the best possible outcome for the client!