隱於幽微
終見於光

委託背景

一家製造業委託人收到新供應商的報價，比現有供應商低三成，交期也更短。採購主管覺得太好了，財務主管覺得太好了才有問題。他們在簽約前委託我們做一次工商徵信。

查到什麼

供應商成立不到一年，資本額不高。

負責人的名字，三個月前還在另一家同業公司的董監事名單上，那家公司辦理董監事變更之後，他的名字消失了。登記資料只呈現變更這件事，不會說明原因。

前一家公司有數件與客戶之間的給付貨款訴訟，部分還在進行中。新供應商本身沒有訴訟，也沒有主管機關的裁處紀錄，這和它成立不久是一致的。

登記地址是共用辦公室，沒有廠房。報價單上的產能來自外包廠，這一點供應商在洽談時沒有提過。

報告的結論

三個訊號並列：資本額低、負責人剛在同業公司被解任、產能靠外包。我們給的結論不是「不要合作」，而是「低價的來源是外包與新公司搶單，風險在履約能力」。登記資料看不出解任的原因，前公司的訴訟也不代表這位負責人有責任，報告裡都寫清楚。

委託人怎麼用

合約條件從原本的預付三成改為預付一成，加入履約保證金，付款改為分批驗收後支付，並加一條負責人或主要股東變動須通知的條款。供應商接受了。到目前為止，交貨正常。

這件事可以複用的判準

• 低價本身不是紅旗。低價加上「解釋不了為什麼便宜」才是
• 一家公司的資本額、成立時間、負責人手上還有哪些公司，是簽約之前就該知道的事
• 登記資料回答得了「什麼時候換了誰」，回答不了「為什麼」。原因要從別的地方補

單篇連結 →

The engagement

A manufacturer received a quotation from a new supplier, 30% below its existing supplier and with a shorter lead time. The purchasing manager thought it was too good. The finance manager thought it was too good to be true. Before signing, they commissioned a due diligence check.

What we found

The supplier was less than a year old with modest capital.

Three months earlier, its principal's name had still been on the board of another company in the same industry. After that company filed a change of directors, his name was gone. Registration data records that a change happened; it never records why.

The former company had several payment disputes with customers, some still pending. The new supplier itself had no litigation and no regulatory sanctions, consistent with its age.

The registered address was a shared office with no plant. The capacity stated in the quotation came from subcontractors, which the supplier had not mentioned in discussions.

What the report concluded

Three signals side by side: low capital, a principal recently removed from a peer company's board, and outsourced capacity. Our conclusion was not "do not deal". It was "the low price comes from subcontracting and a new company chasing volume; the risk is in performance". The report also stated plainly that the registry does not show why he was removed, and that the former company's litigation does not establish his personal responsibility.

What the client did

Prepayment dropped from 30% to 10%. A performance bond was added. Payment moved to instalments on acceptance of each batch, with a clause requiring notice of any change in the principal or major shareholders. The supplier accepted. Deliveries have been on time so far.

What carries over to other cases

• A low price by itself is not a red flag. A low price with no explanation for why it is low is.
• A company's capital, age and the other companies its principal holds are things to know before you sign, not after.
• Registration data answers when someone was replaced. It does not answer why. That part has to come from elsewhere.

Permalink →

委託背景

委託人打贏了一件給付貨款的官司，判決確定後聲請強制執行，法院回報債務人名下查無財產。委託人持執行名義向國稅局申請債務人的財產與所得清單，結果一致：名下沒有不動產，沒有車輛，所得只有少量利息。錢明明存在過，官司打了兩年，人還住在原來的房子裡。

查到什麼

債務人名下現在確實是空的，但兩筆不動產在幾個月前還是他的。

兩筆的登記原因都是夫妻贈與，時間落在一審判決之後、判決確定之前兩個月，權利人是債務人的配偶。

把幾個日期排在一起，案情就清楚了：債權發生在先，接著起訴、一審敗訴，然後是兩筆贈與，最後判決確定，執行時已經查無財產。債權早於贈與，贈與發生在敗訴之後，這兩點是整份報告的核心。

配偶之間的贈與免贈與稅，但辦理登記時仍須向國稅局申報，申報紀錄是另一個可以佐證移轉時點的來源，我們一併寫進報告。

委託人怎麼用

律師以撤銷詐害行為的方向處理。民法規定債務人的無償行為有害及債權者，債權人可以聲請法院撤銷，並請求回復原狀。贈與是無償行為，債權人只需證明有害債權，不需要證明配偶知情。撤銷權有一年的期間，從債權人知道撤銷原因起算，所以律師很快提起訴訟。案件在訴訟中和解，債務人分期清償，委託人收回六成。

這件事可以複用的判準

• 執行無財產，不代表追查結束。國稅局的清單呈現的是現在，財產的過去是另一件事
• 移轉的時間點與債權發生的時間點，哪個在前，往往決定這筆債還有沒有救
• 撤銷權有時效。從知道移轉紀錄那一天開始，時間就在走

單篇連結 →

The engagement

The client had won a claim for unpaid goods. After the judgment became final, they applied for enforcement, and the court reported that the debtor had no assets. The client used the enforcement title to obtain the debtor's property and income statements from the tax bureau. Same answer: no real property, no vehicles, only a little interest income. The money had existed. The case had run two years. The debtor was still living in the same house.

What we found

The debtor's name was indeed empty now. A few months earlier, two properties had still been his.

Both had been transferred as gifts between spouses, after the first-instance judgment and two months before the judgment became final. The transferee was the debtor's spouse.

Put the dates in order and the case speaks for itself: the debt came first, then the filing, then the loss at first instance, then the two gifts, then the judgment becoming final, and finally an enforcement attempt that found nothing. The debt predated the transfers, and the transfers followed the loss. Those two facts were the core of the report.

Gifts between spouses are exempt from gift tax but still require a filing with the tax bureau at registration, and that filing is a second record of when the transfer took place. We included it.

What the client did

Counsel proceeded to set aside the transfers as fraudulent conveyances. Under the Civil Code, where a debtor's gratuitous act prejudices a creditor, the creditor may apply to the court to revoke it and to restore the position. A gift is gratuitous, so the creditor need only show prejudice, not that the spouse knew. The right expires one year from when the creditor learns of the grounds, so counsel filed promptly. The case settled during proceedings, with the debtor paying in instalments. The client recovered 60% of the debt.

What carries over to other cases

• A nil-asset report is not the end of tracing. The tax bureau's statement shows the present; an asset's past is a separate question.
• Which came first, the debt or the transfer, often decides whether the debt is still recoverable.
• The right to revoke has a time limit. The clock starts the day you see the transfer on the record.

Permalink →

委託背景

一位業務主管離職三個月後，委託人有多個長期客戶陸續轉向他新成立的公司。委託人第一個想法是「證明他用了我們的名單」。我們的建議是先退一步：真正要成立的是三件事，名單是營業秘密、公司有保護它、他確實用了。三件缺一，訴訟撐不起來。

這份名單為什麼算營業秘密

營業秘密法要求資訊不是一般同業所知、因為秘密而有經濟價值、所有人採取了合理的保密措施。純粹的客戶名稱與聯絡方式，工商名冊就查得到，法院通常不認為是營業秘密。

這份名單不一樣：每個客戶附有採購週期、決策窗口、歷史報價與折扣階梯，是多年累積整理出來的，外面找不到。

公司有沒有保護它

這一段常常是輸贏所在。委託人手上有：主管到職時簽的保密協議、名單存放系統的權限設定與存取紀錄、檔案上的機密標示、離職時簽的資料返還切結。這些加起來，才說得出「合理的保密措施」。

對方是不是真的用了

離職前兩週，該帳號大量匯出客戶資料，時間集中在下班後。

新公司寄給客戶的報價單，折扣階梯與委託人的內部規則一致，連格式與一處長期存在的錯字都相同。

幾位客戶願意說明接到新公司聯繫的時間，落在離職後兩週內。

委託人怎麼用

律師以此提起民事訴訟並向檢方提出告訴。案件目前仍在進行，細節不便說明。

這件事可以複用的判準

• 「他拿走了名單」不是案子，「名單是秘密、有保護、被用了」才是
• 保密措施是平時就要做的事。沒有保密協議、沒有權限管理、檔案不標機密，事後很難補
• 客戶重疊率、報價結構、時間軸，是證明「用了」最常見的三種痕跡

單篇連結 →

The engagement

Three months after a sales manager left, several of the client's long-standing customers moved their business to the company he had founded. The client's first instinct was to prove he had used their list. Our advice was to step back. Three things have to be established: the list was a trade secret, the company protected it, and he actually used it. Miss one and the case does not stand.

Why the list counted as a trade secret

The Trade Secrets Act requires that the information not be generally known in the trade, that it have economic value because it is secret, and that the owner have taken reasonable steps to keep it secret. A bare list of customer names and contact details is available from business directories, and courts generally do not treat it as a trade secret.

This list was different: each customer carried purchasing cycles, decision-makers, historical pricing and discount tiers, built up over years and not available anywhere outside.

Whether the company protected it

This is where such cases are often won or lost. The client had the non-disclosure agreement signed on joining, the access permissions and logs for the system where the list was kept, confidentiality markings on the files, and the return-of-materials undertaking signed on departure. Together, those amount to reasonable steps.

Whether it was actually used

In the two weeks before departure, his account exported large volumes of customer data, mostly after hours.

The quotations his new company sent to customers used discount tiers matching the client's internal rules, the same format, and the same long-standing typographical error.

Several customers were willing to state when they were first contacted by the new company. The dates fell within two weeks of his departure.

What the client did

Counsel filed a civil action and a criminal complaint. The matter is ongoing and further details cannot be given.

What carries over to other cases

• "He took the list" is not a case. "The list was secret, protected and used" is.
• Protective measures are built in ordinary times. Without an NDA, access controls and confidentiality markings, they are hard to reconstruct afterwards.
• Customer overlap, pricing structure and timeline are the three traces that most often establish use.

Permalink →

委託背景

一家台灣公司準備與東南亞某國的企業成立合資公司，股權對等，各出一半。對方主動提供了當地的公司登記文件，資料完整，股東與董事都在上面，看起來沒有問題。委託人在簽署合資協議前委託我們做背景查核。

查到什麼

對方提供的文件與當地登記資料一致，這部分沒有問題。

同時有一件對方沒提的事：股東名冊上的兩位本地股東，在另外三家公司也同時擔任股東與董事，而那三家公司的登記地址與合資對象相同。

真正的差別出現在訴訟。這個國家的公開判決資料庫查不到對方的紀錄，但該國法院的線上系統只開放當事人與律師，外人看不到還在進行中的案件。實際情況是三件未結訴訟：兩件是前合作方請求給付款項，一件是股東之間的糾紛。三件都在過去一年半內起訴，其中一件的原告是對方上一個合資夥伴。

營運本身沒有問題。當地團隊確認登記地址與工廠都在，規模與宣稱相符。問題不在對方怎麼營運，在對方過去怎麼對待合作夥伴。

委託人怎麼用

合資協議沒有取消，但條件改了。從股權對等一次到位，改為分階段注資：先小額出資設立，依營運里程碑再增資，並加入退出條款與對方訴訟結果的揭露義務。委託人的說法是，合作可以繼續，但不再是「一次把錢全放進去」。

這件事可以複用的判準

• 「當地登記很乾淨」和「對方沒有問題」是兩句話。多數國家的未結訴訟，外人查不到
• 對方主動提供的文件，是核對的起點，不是終點
• 股東與董事在其他公司的重疊，是東南亞市場看實際控制人最有效的線索，因為外資持股限制讓代持安排很常見

單篇連結 →

The engagement

A Taiwanese company was preparing a joint venture with a company in a Southeast Asian country, equal shares, half each. The counterparty had volunteered its local registration documents: complete, shareholders and directors all listed, nothing apparently wrong. Before signing the joint venture agreement, the client commissioned a background check.

What we found

The documents matched the local registry. That part was sound.

Something the counterparty had not mentioned: two of the local shareholders on the register were simultaneously shareholders and directors of three other companies, all registered at the same address as the joint venture partner.

The real difference appeared in litigation. The country's public judgment database showed nothing, but its courts' online system is open only to parties and their lawyers, so pending cases are invisible to outsiders. In fact there were three: two claims for payment by former business partners and one dispute between shareholders. All had been filed within the previous eighteen months, and the plaintiff in one was the counterparty's previous joint venture partner.

Operations themselves were sound. The local team confirmed that the registered address and the plant existed and that the scale matched what had been claimed. The issue was not how the company operated. It was how it had treated its partners.

What the client did

The joint venture went ahead, on different terms. Instead of equal capital paid in at once, contributions were staged: a small initial subscription at formation, further capital against operating milestones, plus an exit clause and an obligation on the counterparty to disclose the outcome of its litigation. In the client's words, the partnership could continue, but not as "put all the money in on day one".

What carries over to other cases

• "The local registry is clean" and "the counterparty is sound" are two different sentences. In most countries, pending litigation is invisible to outsiders.
• Documents volunteered by the other side are the starting point for verification, not the end of it.
• Overlapping shareholders and directors across other companies is the most useful lead to the real controller in Southeast Asian markets, because foreign ownership limits make nominee arrangements common.

Permalink →

委託背景

一家經銷商積欠委託人貨款數月後，通知「公司經營不下去，準備結束」，之後就不再回應。委託人到門市一看，招牌換了名字，裡面還是同一批人在賣同樣的貨。委託人問我們：這樣可以嗎？我們的回答是，先弄清楚發生了什麼，再由律師判斷可不可以。

查到什麼

舊公司的登記狀態是「停業」，不是解散，也不是廢止。停業是公司還在，只是暫停營業並辦了登記。債務還在，法人格也還在。

兩個月前，新設了一家公司。舊公司的負責人與另一位董事都在新公司的董監事名單上，登記地址與舊公司同一棟樓，營業項目相同。門市的電話沒有換，網站的網域也延續使用。

把日期排開：新公司先設立，舊公司再停止付款，最後才通知結束營業，然後才辦停業登記。順序本身就是故事。

門市的現況我們在營業時間走訪過，招牌、陳列的商品品牌、值班人員與舊公司的重疊都有紀錄，全部在公開營業場所拍攝，附時間與地點。

報告的結論

舊公司與新公司在董監事、地址、電話、網域、人員、商品六個項目上重疊。報告不使用「假倒閉」「脫產」這類字眼，因為那是法律結論，我們只把重疊的事實整理到可以釋明的程度。

委託人怎麼用

律師拿報告做兩件事。一是向法院聲請假扣押舊公司尚未移轉的資產，包含應收帳款與庫存。假扣押要釋明債權以及日後不能或甚難執行之虞，同一批人同址開新公司、舊公司停止付款的紀錄，就是「甚難執行之虞」的釋明素材，並依法院要求提供擔保。二是評估對新公司與相關股東的主張，這部分門檻高，律師另行處理。假扣押獲准後，對方回到談判桌，以分期清償和解。

這件事可以複用的判準

• 停業、解散、廢止是三種不同的登記狀態。停業的公司債務還在
• 同一批人、同一個地址、同樣的電話與網域，是「換個名字繼續做」最常留下的痕跡
• 保全是時間競賽。假扣押是先凍結後起訴，資產移轉完就沒得凍。發現異狀的當天就該啟動

單篇連結 →

The engagement

A distributor had owed the client for goods for several months when it announced that the business could not continue and would be wound up, then stopped responding. The client visited the shop. The sign had a new name. Inside, the same people were selling the same goods. The client asked us whether this was allowed. Our answer was to establish first what had happened, and let counsel decide what was allowed.

What we found

The old company's registry status was "suspended", not dissolved and not struck off. Suspension means the company still exists; it has paused trading and registered the pause. Its debts remain, and so does its legal personality.

Two months earlier, a new company had been formed. The old company's principal and one other director were both on its board, it was registered in the same building, and its business scope was identical. The shop's telephone number had not changed and the website domain continued in use.

Put the dates in order: the new company came first, then the old company stopped paying, then it announced closure, and only then filed the suspension. The sequence is the story.

We visited the shop during business hours and recorded the signage, the brands on display and the overlap of staff with the old company, all in a public commercial premises with time and place noted.

What the report concluded

The old and the new company overlapped on six counts: directors, address, telephone, domain, staff and product lines. The report avoided words like "sham insolvency" and "asset stripping", because those are legal conclusions. It arranged the overlapping facts to the standard needed for a prima facie showing.

What the client did

Counsel used the report for two things. First, an application for provisional attachment of the old company's remaining assets, including receivables and stock. Provisional attachment requires a prima facie showing of the claim and of a risk that enforcement will later be impossible or very difficult; the same people forming a new company at the same address and the record of the old company ceasing payment served as that showing, and security was provided as the court required. Second, an assessment of claims against the new company and its shareholders, which carries a high threshold and was handled separately. Once the attachment was granted, the other side returned to the table and settled on an instalment plan.

What carries over to other cases

• Suspended, dissolved and struck off are three different registry statuses. A suspended company still owes its debts.
• The same people, the same address, the same telephone and domain: that is the trail "same business, new name" usually leaves.
• Preservation is a race. Provisional attachment freezes first and sues later; once the assets have moved, there is nothing to freeze. Start the day something looks wrong.

Permalink →

委託背景

委託人準備聘任一位財務長，人選經過三輪面談，各方評價都好。履歷上有兩項亮點：一所海外大學的碩士學位，以及前一家公司的「財務副總」職稱。發聘書之前，董事會要求做一次背景查核，範圍限於履歷上可以查證的項目，並先取得候選人的書面同意。

查到什麼

學校本身是正規院校，這一項沒有問題。但校方的回覆是：查無該姓名的學位授予紀錄，只有一段短期課程的修習紀錄。

前東家人資的回覆，任職期間與履歷相符，職稱是財務經理，不是財務副總。

公開的公司登記與裁判紀錄查無異常。這一項也寫進報告，因為查核要寫查到的，也要寫查不到的。

兩項回覆都以書面保存，連同候選人的同意書一起附在報告後面。

委託人怎麼用

委託人在發聘書前撤回。他們的判斷是：財務長是負責數字正確性的人，履歷上兩項最重要的資歷都與來源不符，不論原因是什麼，信任的基礎已經不在。委託人事後說，查核花的錢是一個月薪水的零頭，省下的是一年後才發現時的損失。

這件事可以複用的判準

• 「學校存在」和「這個人有這個學位」是兩件事
• 查證結果要有對方的書面回覆。口頭查證在後續爭議中幾乎沒有用
• 高階職務的學歷與職稱屬於錄用的重要事項，查證有正當理由，但一定要先取得候選人的書面同意
• 已經聘任才發現的情況，法律上另有處理方式與期限，發現當天就要找律師

單篇連結 →

The engagement

The client was about to appoint a chief financial officer. The candidate had passed three rounds of interviews with strong feedback. The résumé had two highlights: a master's degree from an overseas university and the title of vice president of finance at the previous employer. Before the offer letter went out, the board asked for a background check, limited to items on the résumé that could be verified, with the candidate's written consent obtained first.

What we found

The institution was a recognised university; that much was sound. But its reply was that it had no record of a degree awarded to that name, only attendance at a short course.

The former employer's HR confirmed the dates on the résumé but gave the title as finance manager, not vice president of finance.

Public company registrations and court records showed nothing of note. That went into the report too, because a check must record what was not found as well as what was.

Both replies were kept in writing and attached to the report along with the candidate's consent form.

What the client did

The client withdrew before issuing the offer. Their reasoning: a CFO is the person responsible for the numbers being right, and the two most important credentials on the résumé did not match their sources. Whatever the explanation, the basis for trust was gone. As the client put it afterwards, the check cost a fraction of one month's salary; what it saved was the loss they would have discovered a year later.

What carries over to other cases

• "The university exists" and "this person holds this degree" are two different facts.
• Verification results must be in writing from the source. Oral confirmation is almost useless in a later dispute.
• For senior roles, degrees and titles are material to the hiring decision, so verification is justified, but the candidate's written consent has to come first.
• If the discovery comes after appointment, the law provides a different remedy with its own deadline. See counsel the same day.

Permalink →

一句話說清楚

工商徵信，是在簽約、出貨、投資或聘任之前，把一家公司「說的」和「查得到的」放在一起比對。對方的公司簡介、名片、報價單是它說的；登記資料、法院紀錄、主管機關的裁處紀錄是查得到的。兩邊對得上，合作風險就小；對不上，差在哪裡就是報告的重點。

報告會回答哪些問題

• 這家公司存不存在、成立多久、資本額多少、誰在負責
• 負責人與董監事還有哪些公司，彼此之間有沒有關聯
• 最近有沒有頻繁更換負責人、地址或公司名稱
• 有沒有打過官司、被誰告過、案件是不是還在進行
• 有沒有被主管機關處罰，是不是還在正常營業
• 登記地址與廠房是不是真的存在，規模與宣稱的產能對不對得上
• 同業、上下游怎麼看這家公司

有些事情查不到

一家公司的銀行往來、票信紀錄、負責人的個人信用，法律上只有當事人本人或有執行名義的債權人才拿得到。這些不在報告範圍內。報告會誠實標明哪些是查證結果、哪些是訪查所得的評價。

要多久

一般案件五到十個工作天。急件可以先出初步結果，需要到現場或跨縣市的部分再補。

費用怎麼算

依查證範圍逐項報價，不包裹。你可以只查公司本身，也可以加做負責人個人的關聯公司、境外關係企業，或現場訪查。委託前會先確認範圍與價格，中途不加項目就不加價。

報告長什麼樣

一份報告分三塊：查證結果（附資料來源與查證日期）、差異比對（對方說的和查到的哪裡不一樣）、風險提示（我們建議合作條件上可以怎麼調整）。報告是給決策用的，所以每一項都寫得出來源。

單篇連結 →

In one sentence

Corporate due diligence compares what a company says about itself with what the public record actually shows, before you sign, ship, invest or hire. Brochures, business cards and quotations are what it says. Registration data, court records and regulatory sanctions are what can be verified. Where the two match, the risk is low. Where they diverge, that gap is the point of the report.

What the report answers

• Whether the company exists, how old it is, how much capital it has, and who is responsible for it
• What other companies its principal and directors hold, and how those connect
• Whether it has changed principals, addresses or names unusually often
• Whether it has been sued, by whom, and whether the matter is still running
• Whether it has been sanctioned by a regulator, and whether it is still trading
• Whether the registered address and plant actually exist, and whether their scale matches the claimed capacity
• How peers, suppliers and customers talk about it

Some things cannot be obtained

A company's bank relationships, dishonoured-cheque records and its principal's personal credit are available only to the data subject or to a creditor holding an enforcement title. They are outside the scope of the report. Our reports state clearly which findings are verified and which come from enquiries.

How long it takes

A typical case takes five to ten working days. Urgent matters can have preliminary findings first, with site work and cross-county follow-up added afterwards.

How it is priced

Item by item, not as a bundle. You can commission the company alone, or add the principal's related companies, affiliates abroad, or a site visit. Scope and price are confirmed before we start, and the price does not change unless the scope does.

What the report looks like

Three parts: verified findings with sources and dates, a comparison of what the company claimed against what we found, and risk notes with suggested adjustments to your terms. The report is written for decisions, so every item carries its source.

Permalink →

先分清楚兩件事

第一，「證據能力」和「證明力」是兩回事。證據能力是法院願不願意看；證明力是看了之後信多少。錄音、照片、行蹤紀錄，先過第一關，才談第二關。

第二，證據能不能用，和取證的人會不會被追究，是兩個獨立的問題。同一份材料可能被法院採為證據，取得它的人仍然要為取得方式負責。所以問題從來不是「拿不拿得到」。

刑事案件怎麼看

刑事訴訟法的證據排除規定，文義上針對的是實施刑事訴訟程序的公務員。私人取得的證據不在這一條的射程內，所以最高法院的一貫立場是：私人取證原則上有證據能力，除非取證方式侵害了對方陳述的自由，例如用暴力或脅迫逼出來的話。

自己是對話一方的錄音，通訊保障及監察法設有不罰的規定，前提是非出於不法目的。實務上，為了保全自己的權益、蒐集對方不法行為的證據而錄下自己參與的對話，法院多數會採。錄第三人之間的對話則是另一回事。

民事案件怎麼看

民事訴訟法沒有證據排除的明文，法院依自由心證判斷，但不能違背論理與經驗法則。最高法院近年的作法是做一個權衡：把取證的目的和手段、要保護的利益和被侵害的利益放在一起秤，符合比例原則的就採。

從公開的裁判可以看到兩個方向。一邊是採用：對話一方的錄音、公開場所的觀察紀錄、公開資料的比對。另一邊是排除：侵入他人住處偷錄、為了財產官司大範圍竊聽別人的談話。兩邊的分界線很清楚，就是有沒有踩進對方的私密領域。

證據能力過了，接下來是證明力

一段錄音證明對方說過某句話，不代表證明了對方做過某件事。錄音要有原始檔與逐字譯文，影像要是連續片段，法院看到的和當初取得的必須是同一個東西。整個案件的證據怎麼拼，通常由律師來安排。

怎麼查法院見解

司法院的裁判書查詢系統對任何人開放。選民事或刑事，在全文檢索輸入關鍵字，例如「證據能力 錄音 誠信原則」，就能看到各級法院的實際說理。我們在報告裡引用法院見解時，一律附裁判字號，方便律師直接核對。

單篇連結 →

Two distinctions first

First, admissibility and weight are different questions. Admissibility is whether the court will look at the material at all. Weight is how much it believes once it has looked. Recordings, photographs and surveillance logs must clear the first gate before the second matters.

Second, whether evidence can be used and whether the person who obtained it will answer for how they obtained it are independent questions. The same material may be admitted while its source still has to account for the method. The question is never simply whether something can be obtained.

Criminal proceedings

Taiwan's Code of Criminal Procedure contains an exclusionary rule, but on its wording it applies to public officials conducting criminal proceedings. Evidence obtained by private persons falls outside it. The Supreme Court's consistent position is that privately obtained evidence is in principle admissible, unless the method compromised the other side's freedom to speak, such as a statement extracted by force or threat.

Recording a conversation you are a party to is exempt from punishment under the Communication Security and Surveillance Act, provided it is not done for an unlawful purpose. In practice, courts generally accept recordings made to protect one's own rights or to document the other side's wrongdoing. Recording conversations between third parties is a different matter.

Civil proceedings

The Code of Civil Procedure has no written exclusionary rule. Judges decide on free evaluation, bounded by logic and experience. The Supreme Court's recent approach is a balancing test: weigh the purpose and method of obtaining the evidence, and the interest it protects, against the interest it invades. Where the result is proportionate, the evidence is admitted.

Published judgments show two clear directions. Admitted: recordings by a party to the conversation, observation in public places, comparison of public records. Excluded: covert recording after entering another person's home, and large-scale interception of other people's conversations to win a property dispute. The dividing line is whether the method reached into the other person's private sphere.

After admissibility comes weight

A recording proving that someone said something does not prove that they did something. Audio needs the original file and a verbatim transcript; video needs to be continuous. What the court sees must be what was originally obtained. How the pieces fit together is a matter for counsel.

Looking up court reasoning

The Judicial Yuan's judgment search is open to anyone. Choose civil or criminal, enter keywords in the full-text field, and read how courts at each level actually reason. When we cite a court's position in a report, we always give the case number so counsel can check it directly.

Permalink →

先有同意，才有查核

就業服務法規定，雇主不得要求求職人提供「非屬就業所需之隱私資料」。施行細則把隱私資料講得很具體：信用紀錄、犯罪紀錄、懷孕計畫、背景調查，都在清單上。雇主要拿這些資料，必須與職務目的有正當合理的關聯，而且不能超過必要範圍。

個人資料保護法另外規定，非公務機關蒐集個資要有特定目的，並且符合法定事由之一。背景查核最常用到的兩個事由：當事人同意，以及資料取自一般可得的來源。

所以一份站得住的背景查核，有兩個前提：職務確實需要，候選人知道並且書面同意。

查得到的

• 公司登記關聯。候選人有沒有擔任其他公司的董事、監察人、經理人，任何人都能在經濟部的商工登記公示資料查到。用來看利益衝突與兼職
• 公開裁判。司法院裁判書對外公開，可以檢索候選人是否涉及民事或刑事案件。限制是裁判書會遮隱部分姓名，同名同姓的情況要靠其他資訊交叉確認，不能單憑名字下結論
• 國外學校是否存在。教育部有外國大學校院參考名冊，可以確認候選人填的學校是不是正規院校。名冊不是認可名冊，學校不在名冊上不等於假學歷，只是要再查
• 公開言論與媒體紀錄。候選人自己公開的社群內容、受訪與發表，屬於「當事人自行公開」的資料

需要本人授權的

• 學歷證書真偽。國內學歷向學校核對，國外學歷由本人向駐外館處申請驗證。申請人必須是本人
• 前雇主任職紀錄。職稱、年資、離職原因，要有候選人簽署的同意書才能查證，而且前雇主沒有義務回覆
• 勞保投保紀錄。只有本人能申請，可以請候選人自行下載後提供，用來核對任職期間

只有本人才拿得到的

• 警察刑事紀錄證明。俗稱良民證，只能由本人或本人委託的人申請。它證明的是判決確定並執行的刑事紀錄，偵查中或未定讞的案件不會出現
• 信用報告。聯徵中心的個人信用報告，四種申請管道都限當事人本人
• 醫療與心理資料。施行細則明列為隱私資料，非職務必要不得要求

單篇連結 →

Consent comes before the check

Taiwan's Employment Service Act prohibits employers from demanding "private information not required for the job". The enforcement rules spell out what that means: credit records, criminal records, pregnancy plans and background investigations are all on the list. An employer may ask for such information only where it has a legitimate and reasonable connection to the position, and only to the extent necessary.

The Personal Data Protection Act separately requires that any private organisation collecting personal data have a specific purpose and one of the statutory grounds. The two most relevant to screening are the subject's consent and data obtained from generally available sources.

A background check that holds up therefore rests on two conditions: the role genuinely requires it, and the candidate knows and has consented in writing.

What can be verified

• Company affiliations. Whether the candidate is a director, supervisor or manager of any company is open to anyone through the Ministry of Economic Affairs registry. Used to spot conflicts of interest and undisclosed side roles
• Public judgments. The Judicial Yuan publishes court decisions, which can be searched for civil or criminal matters involving the candidate. Names are partly redacted, so identical names must be cross-checked against other details. A name alone proves nothing
• Whether a foreign school exists. The Ministry of Education maintains a reference list of foreign universities, confirming whether the institution named is a recognised one. It is not an accreditation list; a school's absence does not mean the degree is false, only that it needs further checking
• Public statements and media. Content the candidate has published, interviews given and articles written count as data the subject has made public

What requires the candidate's authorisation

• Authenticity of degrees. Domestic degrees are confirmed with the institution; foreign degrees are authenticated by the candidate applying to the relevant Taiwan overseas mission. The applicant must be the candidate
• Employment history. Title, tenure and reason for leaving can be checked only on the candidate's signed consent, and the former employer is under no obligation to answer
• Labour insurance records. Only the insured person can obtain them. Candidates can download and provide the record, which confirms employment periods

What only the subject can obtain

• Police criminal record certificate. Issued only to the person concerned or someone they have authorised. It records convictions that are final and executed; pending investigations and unconcluded cases do not appear
• Credit reports. The Joint Credit Information Center's personal report is available through four channels, all restricted to the data subject
• Medical and psychological data. Listed as private information in the enforcement rules and not to be requested unless essential to the role

Permalink →

先有執行名義，很多門才會開

判決確定、本票裁定、確定的支付命令、法院和解或調解筆錄，這些都是執行名義。拿到執行名義之前，能用的只有任何人都能查的公開資料；拿到之後，稅務資料、車籍，以及透過法院向銀行與雇主的函查，才會對你打開。

五個來源

一、不動產登記

土地登記規則把謄本分成三類。第二類謄本任何人都能申請，但會隱匿部分姓名、統一編號與出生日期，而且必須先知道地號或建號。也就是說，你可以知道「這間房子是誰的」，但不能直接知道「這個人名下有哪些房子」。要從一個人找到他名下的不動產，得走第五個來源。第三類謄本要利害關係人才能申請。

二、公司登記與股權

經濟部的商工登記公示資料任何人可查。債務人如果是有限公司的股東，出資額會登記；如果是股份有限公司的董事或監察人，持股數會登記。股權可以作為執行標的，而債務人擔任負責人的公司，也是追查資產流向的起點。

三、車籍

車籍不是公開資料。債權人必須在強制執行程序中，持法院命債權人查報的證明，才能向監理機關申請查詢債務人名下車輛。監理機關對外的有償查詢只提供車輛資料，查不到車主是誰。

四、法院公告與拍賣紀錄

司法院的法拍屋查詢系統免費公開，包含不動產與動產的拍賣公告。看得到債務人的財產是否已經被其他債權人聲請執行，也看得到已經進入拍賣的標的。其他債權人走在前面，代表你要決定是參與分配還是另找標的。

五、稅務資料

稅捐稽徵法規定稅務資料應保密，但明列例外，其中一款是已取得民事確定判決或其他執行名義的債權人。持執行名義向國稅局申請，可以取得債務人的財產與所得清單，這是從一個人找到他名下財產最直接的一條路，會收取少量規費。財產清單呈現不動產與車輛，所得清單呈現薪資與利息來源，後者就是銀行帳戶與雇主的線索。

法院這一端

強制執行法賦予執行法院兩項權力。一是向稅捐及其他機關、團體或知悉債務人財產的人調查，受調查者不得拒絕，銀行存款、薪資、保險就是這樣查的。二是命債務人據實報告一年內的財產狀況，不報告或虛偽報告，法院可以命提供擔保或限期履行，極端情況可以管收。這兩項都要由債權人向法院聲請，通常由律師處理。

存款、勞保、郵局帳戶這些，沒有任何民間管道可以查，一律透過執行法院。

單篇連結 →

Most doors open only with an enforcement title

A final judgment, a court order on a promissory note, a final payment order, or a court-recorded settlement: each of these is an enforcement title. Before you hold one, you can use only the records open to anyone. Once you have one, tax data, vehicle records and court enquiries to banks and employers become available.

The five sources

1. Land registration

Taiwan's land registration rules divide extracts into three classes. Class two is available to anyone but redacts part of the owner's name, ID number and date of birth, and it requires the lot or building number in advance. You can learn who owns a property; you cannot directly learn what property a person owns. Searching by person runs through the fifth source below. Class three requires a legal interest in the property.

2. Company registration and shareholdings

The Ministry of Economic Affairs registry is open to anyone. If the debtor is a member of a limited company, the capital contribution is recorded. If the debtor is a director or supervisor of a company limited by shares, the shareholding is recorded. Shares can be the object of enforcement, and a company the debtor runs is the starting point for following where money went.

3. Vehicle registration

Vehicle records are not public. A creditor may query the debtor's vehicles with the motor vehicle office only during enforcement proceedings, on production of the court's instruction to report assets. The office's public paid enquiry returns vehicle data only, never the owner.

4. Court notices and auction records

The Judicial Yuan's auction search is free and public, covering both real property and movables. It shows whether the debtor's assets are already under enforcement by other creditors and what has reached auction. If others are ahead of you, the decision is whether to join the distribution or look for other assets.

5. Tax data

The Tax Collection Act makes tax data confidential but lists exceptions, one of which is a creditor holding a final civil judgment or other enforcement title. On presenting the title to the National Taxation Bureau, the creditor can obtain the debtor's property and income statements for a small fee. This is the most direct way to search by person. The property statement shows real estate and vehicles; the income statement shows salary and interest sources, which point to employers and bank accounts.

The court's side

The Compulsory Enforcement Act gives the enforcement court two powers. It may make enquiries of tax authorities, other agencies and anyone who knows the debtor's financial position, and those asked may not refuse; this is how bank deposits, wages and insurance are located. It may also order the debtor to report truthfully all assets held in the preceding year; a debtor who fails to report or reports falsely may be ordered to provide security or perform within a deadline, and in extreme cases may be detained. Both require an application by the creditor, usually made through counsel.

Bank deposits, labour insurance and postal accounts have no private channel at all. They run through the enforcement court.

Permalink →

公開登記：各國落差很大

台灣的公開資料只涵蓋台灣。對方在境外，第一個問題是當地的公司登記公開到什麼程度，而各國差異大到會影響整件事的作法。

• 英國的公司登記全部免費，連董事、實際控制人、歷年文件、被取消資格的董事都查得到，是最透明的一端
• 美國的州登記常常只有公司名稱、成立日與註冊代理人，董事與股東一律不在登記上
• 香港可以付費查董事與股東，但董事的住址與完整身分證號自 2021 年起列為受保護資料，一般公眾查不到
• 新加坡付費的商業檔案含董事與股東名冊
• 日本的商業登記查得到董監事，查不到股東
• 泰國免費可查股東名單與外資持股比例，但介面以泰文為主
• 中國大陸有公開的企業信用資訊公示系統，涵蓋法定代表人、股東出資、行政處罰與經營異常紀錄

同一個問題「對方的股東是誰」，在英國十分鐘有答案，在美國可能永遠沒有答案，在泰國要會泰文。報告會寫清楚每一項資料出自哪個系統。

法院紀錄：未結訴訟最難

已判決的案件多數國家有公開的裁判資料庫，但還在進行中的官司，多數地方外人看不到。泰國的法院線上系統只開放當事人與律師；日本法院官方明白表示並非所有判決都公開；新加坡要先知道案號；美國聯邦法院的系統可以查繫屬中的案件，州法院則各州自成一套。

所以「對方在當地沒有訴訟」這句話，通常只能說成「在公開來源查不到訴訟」。要確認未結案件，往往得透過當地律師向法院查冊。

各地對調查業的管理不同

新加坡是執照制，機構與個人都要領照；日本是向公安委員會報備的届出制；馬來西亞由內政部發照；香港沒有私家偵探牌照制度；英國雖有授權立法但至今未實施強制執照。報告會註明每一項資料的執行單位與所在地。

個資與司法互助的限制

台灣的個人資料保護法對國際傳輸設有限制，主管機關在接受國保護不完善等情形下可以限制傳輸。反過來，歐盟與新加坡、日本各有自己的個資法，當地團隊蒐集資料同樣受其規範。

司法互助方面，台灣有國際刑事司法互助法，協助範圍包含取得證據與送達文書，但只限刑事案件。台灣不是海牙取證公約的締約方，民事案件的跨境取證沒有條約管道，實務上只能靠公開資料、當地律師與自願配合的當事人。這是委託前就要知道的界限。

東南亞常見的登記盲點

登記簿上的法定代表人只是對外代表，不等於實際控制人。東南亞多國對外資持股有限制，實務上出現由本地人代持股份的安排，泰國與印尼的法律分別對代持設有處罰或宣告無效的規定。股東名冊之外，董事在其他公司的兼職、登記地址的重疊與資金流向，才看得出誰在做決定。

單篇連結 →

Public registries differ widely

Taiwan's public records cover Taiwan only. When the subject is abroad, the first question is how much the local company registry discloses, and the answer varies enough to change the whole approach.

• The United Kingdom publishes everything free of charge: directors, persons with significant control, historical filings and disqualified directors. It is the transparent end of the scale
• The United States state registries often show only the company name, formation date and registered agent. Directors and shareholders are never on the record
• Hong Kong provides directors and shareholders for a fee, but directors' residential addresses and full identification numbers have been protected data since 2021
• Singapore sells a business profile that includes directors and the shareholder register
• Japan commercial registers show officers but not shareholders
• Thailand offers shareholder lists and foreign ownership percentages free, with an interface mainly in Thai
• Mainland China has a public enterprise credit system covering the legal representative, shareholders and contributions, administrative penalties and abnormal operation records

The same question, "who are the shareholders", has an answer in ten minutes in the UK, may have no answer at all in the US, and requires Thai in Thailand. The report states which system each item came from.

Court records: pending cases are the hard part

Most countries publish decided cases in some form, but litigation still in progress is usually invisible to outsiders. Thailand's online court system is open only to parties and their lawyers. Japan's courts state expressly that not all judgments are published. Singapore requires the case number in advance. The US federal system does show pending cases; state courts each run their own.

"No litigation in the local record" therefore usually means "no litigation found in public sources". Confirming pending matters generally requires a local lawyer to search the court registry.

Regulation of investigators differs by place

Singapore licenses both agencies and individuals. Japan requires notification to the prefectural public safety commission. Malaysia licenses through the home ministry. Hong Kong has no licensing regime for private investigators. The UK has enabling legislation that has never been brought into force. The report names the executing party and jurisdiction for every item.

Data protection and judicial assistance

Taiwan's Personal Data Protection Act restricts international transfers, and the competent authority may limit transfers where the receiving country's protection is inadequate. In the other direction, the EU, Singapore and Japan each have their own data laws, which bind a local team just as much.

On judicial assistance, Taiwan's International Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act covers obtaining evidence and serving documents, but only in criminal cases. Taiwan is not a party to the Hague Evidence Convention, so there is no treaty channel for cross-border evidence in civil matters. In practice, civil cases rely on public records, local counsel and parties who cooperate voluntarily. This is a boundary to understand before commissioning the work.

A common blind spot in Southeast Asia

The legal representative on the register is the company's external face, not necessarily its controller. Several Southeast Asian countries restrict foreign shareholding, and nominee arrangements with local shareholders are common in practice. Thailand penalises nominee holdings and Indonesia treats nominee agreements as void. Beyond the shareholder list, it is directors' other appointments, overlapping registered addresses and the flow of funds that show who actually decides.

Permalink →