The Tainan District Court clarified the changes in the punishment of Guo Zaiqin’s land loan fraud case, saying that the trial should be conducted independently in accordance with the law and without privileges

The Tainan District Court clarified that Guo Zaiqin's land loan fraud case was an independent case. The circumstances of the case were different from those of other cases. The change in punishment was purely based on legal determination and had no privileges. The outside world was urged not to speculate. (File photo)

The Tainan District Court previously made a ruling to revoke former Democratic Progressive Party Central Executive Committee member Guo Zaiqin's technological equipment monitoring in the land loan fraud case and instead restricted travel abroad and overseas travel. This caused the Blue Committee to question the court's differential treatment. The Southern Court clarified that the change in punishment was purely based on legal determination and had no privileges. The outside world was urged not to make arbitrary speculations.

In response to external questions about why Guo Zaiqin was able to remove the surveillance equipment, the hospital stated that after the case was prosecuted, the presiding judge reviewed in detail all the evidence and materials in the file and the facts of the case. After a comprehensive evaluation by the collegial panel, the judge believed that imposing compulsory sanctions against the parties, such as restrictions on leaving the country and overseas, would be enough to ensure that Guo Zaiqin would appear in the case for trial in the future.

Please read on...

Regarding the cancellation of the monitoring of technological equipment implemented during the investigation stage, it was emphasized that the judge had made a comprehensive consideration and exercised his powers in accordance with the law after reviewing the entire case file and the actual progress of the litigation. This is not only an independent trial result obtained by the judge in accordance with the legal opinion, but also a re-examination of the necessity of compulsory punishment, which should be respected by all walks of life.

In the face of public opinion comparing Guo Zaiqin’s case with other high-profile cases, the Southern Court emphasized that the circumstances involved in this case are completely different from those in his case, and there is no necessary correlation between them. Each lawsuit is an independent case and should be determined and handled by the respective judges in accordance with the law. Confusing different cases together or using this to accuse the judiciary of differential treatment lacks substantial basis. If you are dissatisfied with the result, you can seek relief according to law.

The Southern Court reiterated that the change of compulsory punishment for Guo Zaiqin was not mixed or considered other non-legal factors. It called on all walks of life not to make arbitrary speculations and to return the focus to the discussion of objective evidence, leaving the judge with a pure and uninterrupted trial space.

No need to draw, no need to grab. Now use the APP to read the news. You are guaranteed to win every day. Click me to download the APP. Click me to see the event details.