Former Ministry of Justice Specialist Acquitted for Helping Friend Check Inmate Status
A former specialist of the Ministry of Justice was acquitted by the New Taipei District Court for helping a friend check an inmate's detention status after retirement, as he was no longer a civil servant and did not gain personal benefit.
📋 Article Processing Timeline
- 📰 Published: June 10, 2026 at 13:23
- 🔍 Collected: June 10, 2026 at 13:32 (9 min after Published)
- 🤖 AI Analyzed: June 10, 2026 at 13:33 (0 min after Collected)
(Central News Agency, reporter Cao Yayan, New Taipei 10th) A former specialist of the Ministry of Justice's Department of Comprehensive Planning, surnamed Luo, was charged with criminal offenses including civil servant leakage of secrets for helping a friend check another person's detention status. The New Taipei District Court ruled today that Luo was no longer a civil servant at the time of the incident and did not gain any personal benefit, acquitting him.
According to the verdict, Luo served as a specialist in the Ministry of Justice's Department of Comprehensive Planning from 2007 to 2020. In 2018, he was introduced to a person surnamed Xiao through an acquaintance. Xiao learned that Luo worked at the Ministry of Justice and had access to check parole results of inmates.
In February 2021, Xiao's friend had failed to collect a debt from a person surnamed Li. To confirm whether Li was in custody, Xiao asked another acquaintance to check on his behalf. This acquaintance sent a message via LINE asking, "Brother, is there a way to check the status of someone at Taipei Detention Center?" and entrusted Luo to check Li's detention status.
Luo used his influence over the staff at the Taipei Liaison Office of the Correctional Agency, instructing an unknowing staff member to conduct the check. He then replied to Xiao via LINE with "Yes - visitation prohibited - Banking Act." He was charged with criminal offenses including civil servant leakage of secrets and illegal use of personal data by a civil servant.
The New Taipei District Court acquitted Luo today. The collegiate panel stated that Luo was already retired at the time of the act and did not hold civil servant status, thus not meeting the elements of the crime of civil servant leakage of secrets. It was also difficult to conclude that Luo learned of Li's detention status through his official duties or business.
Regarding the Personal Data Protection Act, the panel found that Luo was no longer a civil servant at the time, did not gain any monetary or material benefits from the act, had no prior acquaintance with Li, and was unaware of the purpose of Xiao's inquiry. Therefore, it was difficult to find intent for unlawful gain for himself or a third party, or intent to harm others' interests, and the elements of the crime were not met. The verdict is subject to appeal. (Editor: Zhang Mingkun) 1150610
According to the verdict, Luo served as a specialist in the Ministry of Justice's Department of Comprehensive Planning from 2007 to 2020. In 2018, he was introduced to a person surnamed Xiao through an acquaintance. Xiao learned that Luo worked at the Ministry of Justice and had access to check parole results of inmates.
In February 2021, Xiao's friend had failed to collect a debt from a person surnamed Li. To confirm whether Li was in custody, Xiao asked another acquaintance to check on his behalf. This acquaintance sent a message via LINE asking, "Brother, is there a way to check the status of someone at Taipei Detention Center?" and entrusted Luo to check Li's detention status.
Luo used his influence over the staff at the Taipei Liaison Office of the Correctional Agency, instructing an unknowing staff member to conduct the check. He then replied to Xiao via LINE with "Yes - visitation prohibited - Banking Act." He was charged with criminal offenses including civil servant leakage of secrets and illegal use of personal data by a civil servant.
The New Taipei District Court acquitted Luo today. The collegiate panel stated that Luo was already retired at the time of the act and did not hold civil servant status, thus not meeting the elements of the crime of civil servant leakage of secrets. It was also difficult to conclude that Luo learned of Li's detention status through his official duties or business.
Regarding the Personal Data Protection Act, the panel found that Luo was no longer a civil servant at the time, did not gain any monetary or material benefits from the act, had no prior acquaintance with Li, and was unaware of the purpose of Xiao's inquiry. Therefore, it was difficult to find intent for unlawful gain for himself or a third party, or intent to harm others' interests, and the elements of the crime were not met. The verdict is subject to appeal. (Editor: Zhang Mingkun) 1150610
FAQ
What is the significance of this verdict?
It clarifies the scope of criminal liability for actions taken by civil servants after retirement.
Why was Luo acquitted?
Because he was not a civil servant at the time of the act and did not gain any benefit, thus not meeting the elements of the crime.
Is this verdict final?
No, it is not final; the prosecution can appeal.