
Li Bodao, the former president of the Correctional Court, was involved in a sexually harassing female subordinate. After losing an administrative lawsuit, he appealed. The Supreme Administrative Court today dismissed the appeal and the entire case was confirmed.
AI-generated summary
Li Bodao, the former president of the Correctional Court, was accused of sexually harassing a female subordinate on the eve of his retirement in 2023. After an investigation by the Judicial Yuan's Sexuality Review Committee, the case was found to be true and transferred to the Law Review Committee.
In the case of Li Bodao, the former president of the Correctional Court, who sexually harassed his female subordinate, the Sexual Harassment Complaint Handling and Evaluation Committee of the Judicial Yuan decided in July 2023 that Li Bodao constituted sexual harassment and transferred it to the Judges Evaluation Committee for evaluation. Li Bodao filed an administrative lawsuit but failed. Li Bodao appealed, and the Supreme Administrative Court rejected the appeal today, and the entire case was confirmed.
Li Bodao was originally supposed to retire in July 2023, but when he was about to retire, he was accused of hugging a female subordinate four times. In May of the same year, Li Bodao was allowed to resign due to health reasons and moved out of the dormitory on June 21. Subsequently, the victim formally filed a sexual harassment complaint with the Judicial Yuan Sex Assessment Committee, which formed a task force to investigate. After investigating the case, the task force submitted an investigation report in July of the same year. All 11 members of the application review committee attended the review on July 24 and decided that sexual harassment was established and transferred to the law review committee for review.
In this regard, Li Bodao issued a statement stating that during the investigation, he repeatedly requested to investigate evidence that was favorable to him but was ignored. He questioned that the application review committee was ignored and wanted to smear and retaliate against him and his family. He also stated that he would seek legal relief. After his application was rejected, he filed an administrative lawsuit.
In the first instance, the court held that Li Bodao's letters contained expressions of love and affection between men and women, which exceeded the official relationship, and therefore determined that Li Bodao did express love and affection between men and women and constituted sexual harassment. In addition, when the female subordinate complained to Lin Huihuang, the then Secretary-General of the Judicial Yuan, she reacted emotionally and said, "I dare not refuse because I am afraid that he will retaliate against me." This proves that the woman did not ask for help in the office to avoid being retaliated by Li Bodao.
The first instance of the court pointed out that although Li Bodao claimed that the witness and the female subordinate colluded with false facts, time and place, etc., when Li Bodao was informed by Lin Huihuang afterwards, he immediately responded, "I don't want to be in love, I will cooperate in whatever I do," and "The woman should not say anything, because this will attract the attention of all parties, and the woman will also feel pressure." Li was dissatisfied and appealed. The Supreme Administrative Court rejected the appeal today, and Li Bodao was confirmed to have lost the case.
In addition, Li Bodao was suspected of sexual harassment and bullying of female subordinates during his term as president. In March 2023, the Supervisory Yuan passed the impeachment in part of the sexual harassment case and transferred it to the disciplinary court for trial; on May 19, 2025, the Supervisory Yuan also found that he bullied two female subordinates. , passed impeachment again, and after the two cases were transferred to the disciplinary court, the cases were consolidated for trial. On March 26 this year, it was ruled that Li Bodao was dismissed from office and suspended for one year. He was not allowed to recognize lawyers, was not allowed to return to the position of judge, and his pension and pension were reduced by 60% from the beginning.

In 2024, a Jingshe murder occurred at Shuiyue Caotang in Taipei City. Buddhist writer Wang Xiu was sentenced to 12 years in prison in the first instance. The High Court originally granted a bail of NT$6 million and technological monitoring. However, the Supreme Court revoked the original ruling and remanded it back to the High Court for a further ruling.

On October 8, 2026, the Intermediate People's Court of Ningbo City, Zhejiang Province publicly sentenced Xu Chuanzhi, the former deputy ministerial inspection commissioner of the Central Inspection Team, for accepting bribes and using his influence to accept bribes. Xu Chuanzhi was sentenced to 12 years in prison for several crimes and fined RMB 2.5 million.

The Supreme People's Court of China and the All-China Federation of Industry and Commerce released 10 typical cases of diversified settlement of disputes in the private economic field, focusing on resolving disputes over arrears of corporate accounts, and relying on the "court + chamber of commerce" mechanism to resolve the "triangular debt" problem in the construction industry.

Fuyu Liyue International Co., Ltd. was fined NT$30,000 by the Ministry of the Interior for publishing Hong Kong and Macao immigration information on its official website without prior review. The presiding judge Lin Jingchao believed that the provision involved pre-examination and requested an interpretation of the constitution. The Constitutional Court today declared that the relevant provisions are unconstitutional and will become invalid from the date of judgment.

The mother of slain Hong Kong socialite Abby Choi Tin-fung testified in High Court, describing her former father-in-law as a cunning old fox who depended on family allowances.

Xie Wenxiong killed his wife and sister-in-law on the street in Tucheng, New Taipei last year, and was sentenced to life imprisonment in the first instance. The New Taipei Procuratorate believes that the original judgment was too restrictive in explaining the most serious criminal circumstances, and only set the death penalty threshold for killing three or more people, without fully considering premeditation, cruel means and the risk of re-offending, and has filed an appeal.