Taipei Prosecutors' Office Appeals After First Instance in Jinghua City Case Did Not Recognize NT$15 Million Bribe
In the Jinghua City case and political donation case, the Taipei District Court sentenced former Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je to 17 years in prison. However, the Taipei Prosecutors' Office appealed, believing the original judgment did not include the NT$15 million bribe from Shen Qing-jing in the sentencing basis, raising concerns about a lenient sentence.
📋 Article Processing Timeline
- 📰 Published: April 30, 2026 at 15:10
- 🔍 Collected: April 30, 2026 at 15:32 (21 min after Published)
- 🤖 AI Analyzed: April 30, 2026 at 18:47 (3h 15m after Collected)
Central News Agency
(Central News Agency reporter Lin Chang-shun, Taipei, 30th) In the Jinghua City case and political donation case, the Taipei District Court sentenced Ko Wen-je to 17 years in prison for corruption and other offenses. The Taipei Prosecutors' Office believes that the original judgment did not include the NT$15 million bribe from Shen Qing-jing to Ko Wen-je as a factual basis for sentencing, raising concerns that the sentence is too lenient, and today filed an appeal.
The Taipei Prosecutors' Office today appealed against the "facts of the crime and sentencing" for defendants Ko Wen-je, Shen Qing-jing, Li Wen-tsung, Li Wen-chuan, Chang Chih-cheng, and Wu Shun-min; and appealed against the "sentencing" for defendants Huang Ching-mao, Ying Hsiao-wei, and Duan Mu-zheng; no appeal was filed for defendants Peng Chen-sheng and Shao Hsiu-pei regarding their suspended sentences.
The Taipei District Court, in its trial of the Jinghua City case and Ko Wen-je's political donation case, sentenced former Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je on March 26 this year to 13 years in prison and deprivation of civil rights for 6 years for corruption offenses related to official duties; separate sentences of 2 years and 3 years and 6 months for embezzlement of political donations; and 2 years and 6 months for breach of trust in misappropriating funds from the Zhongwang Foundation to pay campaign staff salaries. The total enforceable sentence is 17 years in prison and deprivation of civil rights for 6 years.
Regarding the NT$15 million bribe allegedly received by Ko Wen-je from Wei-Chuan Group chairman Shen Qing-jing, no separate not guilty verdict was issued.
In addition, Shen Qing-jing was sentenced to 10 years in prison and deprived of civil rights for 5 years; Kuomintang Taipei City Councilor Ying Hsiao-wei was sentenced to 15 years and 6 months in prison and deprived of civil rights for 6 years. Former Taipei City Mayor's Office Director Li Wen-tsung was sentenced to 4 years and 6 months; former Taipei City Deputy Mayor Peng Chen-sheng was sentenced to 2 years in prison, deprived of civil rights for 1 year, with a 3-year suspended sentence.
Former Taipei City Public Works Department Director Huang Ching-mao was sentenced to 6 years and 6 months in prison and deprived of civil rights for 3 years; former Taipei City Urban Planning Committee Executive Secretary Shao Hsiu-pei was sentenced to 1 year and 3 months, with a 3-year suspended sentence; former Muke Company Chairman Li Wen-chuan was sentenced to 2 years and 4 months; accountant Duan Mu-zheng was sentenced to 1 year; Ying Hsiao-wei's consultant Wu Shun-min and Jinghua City supervisor Chang Chih-cheng were acquitted.
The Taipei Prosecutors' Office pointed out that Ko Wen-je and Shen Qing-jing were involved in corruption. Regarding the offense of granting illegal benefits, the original judgment failed to recognize that defendants Ko Wen-je and Shen Qing-jing jointly pressured witness Lin Chung-chieh in February 2022, resulting in an incomplete discussion of the facts of the crime and the basis for sentencing, which should be re-examined. Regarding the offense of receiving bribes, the original judgment's failure to issue a separate not guilty verdict for Ko Wen-je's alleged receipt of NT$15 million in cash bribes from Shen Qing-jing was an error in recognition and application of law.
The Taipei Prosecutors' Office stated that the work ledger should be considered a "document of account nature" rather than merely testimonial evidence. The work ledger serves as corroborating evidence for Ko Wen-je's "confession against himself" during the investigation. Ko Wen-je's objective conversation record, in which he sent a message to witness Huang Shan-shan stating "Wei-Chuan Xiao Shen has already given," serves as corroborating evidence for receiving a NT$15 million bribe. The NT$16 million withdrawn by Shen Qing-jing as instructed by witness Wu Cai-xian has a close temporal connection with the record in the work ledger.
The Taipei Prosecutors' Office stated that the total amount of bribes received by Ko Wen-je and given by Shen Qing-jing in this case should be NT$17.1 million (NT$2.1 million + NT$15 million) as recorded in the work ledger, which is consistent with the truth.
The Taipei Prosecutors' Office believes that the original judgment, regarding Ko Wen-je and Shen Qing-jing's offenses of receiving and giving bribes, failed to recognize the NT$15 million bribe given by Shen Qing-jing to Ko Wen-je, and the fact that Shen Qing-jing and Ko Wen-je jointly pressured the Department of Economic Development in February 2022 to expedite approval of Dingyue Company's requests as facts of the crime. This has substantially shaken the factual basis for sentencing considerations. Coupled with the NT$15 million amount being significantly higher than the NT$2.1 million bribe recognized by the original judgment, the original judgment for defendants Ko Wen-je and Shen Qing-jing has a strong possibility of being too lenient.
Additionally, regarding the offenses of embezzlement by Ko Wen-je, Li Wen-tsung, and Li Wen-chuan, the Taipei Prosecutors' Office believes that the three individuals used Muke Company to embezzle over NT$60 million, which was political donation money and remaining political donation funds. The significance of this amount is not only in infringing on property rights but also in eroding the credibility of the political donation system, constituting a highly public infringement of legal interests, and its unlawful content is significantly higher than that of ordinary embezzlement cases. The original judgment did not sufficiently give heavier weight to this significant systemic damage, resulting in a clearly low sentence, violating the principle of proportionality of crime and punishment. (Editor: Chang Ya-ching) 1150430
(Central News Agency reporter Lin Chang-shun, Taipei, 30th) In the Jinghua City case and political donation case, the Taipei District Court sentenced Ko Wen-je to 17 years in prison for corruption and other offenses. The Taipei Prosecutors' Office believes that the original judgment did not include the NT$15 million bribe from Shen Qing-jing to Ko Wen-je as a factual basis for sentencing, raising concerns that the sentence is too lenient, and today filed an appeal.
The Taipei Prosecutors' Office today appealed against the "facts of the crime and sentencing" for defendants Ko Wen-je, Shen Qing-jing, Li Wen-tsung, Li Wen-chuan, Chang Chih-cheng, and Wu Shun-min; and appealed against the "sentencing" for defendants Huang Ching-mao, Ying Hsiao-wei, and Duan Mu-zheng; no appeal was filed for defendants Peng Chen-sheng and Shao Hsiu-pei regarding their suspended sentences.
The Taipei District Court, in its trial of the Jinghua City case and Ko Wen-je's political donation case, sentenced former Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je on March 26 this year to 13 years in prison and deprivation of civil rights for 6 years for corruption offenses related to official duties; separate sentences of 2 years and 3 years and 6 months for embezzlement of political donations; and 2 years and 6 months for breach of trust in misappropriating funds from the Zhongwang Foundation to pay campaign staff salaries. The total enforceable sentence is 17 years in prison and deprivation of civil rights for 6 years.
Regarding the NT$15 million bribe allegedly received by Ko Wen-je from Wei-Chuan Group chairman Shen Qing-jing, no separate not guilty verdict was issued.
In addition, Shen Qing-jing was sentenced to 10 years in prison and deprived of civil rights for 5 years; Kuomintang Taipei City Councilor Ying Hsiao-wei was sentenced to 15 years and 6 months in prison and deprived of civil rights for 6 years. Former Taipei City Mayor's Office Director Li Wen-tsung was sentenced to 4 years and 6 months; former Taipei City Deputy Mayor Peng Chen-sheng was sentenced to 2 years in prison, deprived of civil rights for 1 year, with a 3-year suspended sentence.
Former Taipei City Public Works Department Director Huang Ching-mao was sentenced to 6 years and 6 months in prison and deprived of civil rights for 3 years; former Taipei City Urban Planning Committee Executive Secretary Shao Hsiu-pei was sentenced to 1 year and 3 months, with a 3-year suspended sentence; former Muke Company Chairman Li Wen-chuan was sentenced to 2 years and 4 months; accountant Duan Mu-zheng was sentenced to 1 year; Ying Hsiao-wei's consultant Wu Shun-min and Jinghua City supervisor Chang Chih-cheng were acquitted.
The Taipei Prosecutors' Office pointed out that Ko Wen-je and Shen Qing-jing were involved in corruption. Regarding the offense of granting illegal benefits, the original judgment failed to recognize that defendants Ko Wen-je and Shen Qing-jing jointly pressured witness Lin Chung-chieh in February 2022, resulting in an incomplete discussion of the facts of the crime and the basis for sentencing, which should be re-examined. Regarding the offense of receiving bribes, the original judgment's failure to issue a separate not guilty verdict for Ko Wen-je's alleged receipt of NT$15 million in cash bribes from Shen Qing-jing was an error in recognition and application of law.
The Taipei Prosecutors' Office stated that the work ledger should be considered a "document of account nature" rather than merely testimonial evidence. The work ledger serves as corroborating evidence for Ko Wen-je's "confession against himself" during the investigation. Ko Wen-je's objective conversation record, in which he sent a message to witness Huang Shan-shan stating "Wei-Chuan Xiao Shen has already given," serves as corroborating evidence for receiving a NT$15 million bribe. The NT$16 million withdrawn by Shen Qing-jing as instructed by witness Wu Cai-xian has a close temporal connection with the record in the work ledger.
The Taipei Prosecutors' Office stated that the total amount of bribes received by Ko Wen-je and given by Shen Qing-jing in this case should be NT$17.1 million (NT$2.1 million + NT$15 million) as recorded in the work ledger, which is consistent with the truth.
The Taipei Prosecutors' Office believes that the original judgment, regarding Ko Wen-je and Shen Qing-jing's offenses of receiving and giving bribes, failed to recognize the NT$15 million bribe given by Shen Qing-jing to Ko Wen-je, and the fact that Shen Qing-jing and Ko Wen-je jointly pressured the Department of Economic Development in February 2022 to expedite approval of Dingyue Company's requests as facts of the crime. This has substantially shaken the factual basis for sentencing considerations. Coupled with the NT$15 million amount being significantly higher than the NT$2.1 million bribe recognized by the original judgment, the original judgment for defendants Ko Wen-je and Shen Qing-jing has a strong possibility of being too lenient.
Additionally, regarding the offenses of embezzlement by Ko Wen-je, Li Wen-tsung, and Li Wen-chuan, the Taipei Prosecutors' Office believes that the three individuals used Muke Company to embezzle over NT$60 million, which was political donation money and remaining political donation funds. The significance of this amount is not only in infringing on property rights but also in eroding the credibility of the political donation system, constituting a highly public infringement of legal interests, and its unlawful content is significantly higher than that of ordinary embezzlement cases. The original judgment did not sufficiently give heavier weight to this significant systemic damage, resulting in a clearly low sentence, violating the principle of proportionality of crime and punishment. (Editor: Chang Ya-ching) 1150430