After serving his sentence, he was acquitted after a retrial.

After serving his sentence, he was acquitted after a retrial.

In the Nangang Exhibition Hall project bidding fraud case, many external selection committee members were accused of taking bribes. Among them, Wang Longchang, a former professor at the Institute of Civil Engineering and Disaster Prevention of Taipei University of Technology, was sentenced to seven years in prison and sentenced to death in August. He served more than three years in prison and was paroled. He was acquitted through a retrial on the 1st of this month. However, another selection committee member in the same case, Zhou Jiapeng, an associate professor at Tamkang University, was also accused of accepting NT$1 million by a briber. Although he was sentenced to a severe sentence in the first instance, the second instance was acquitted due to lack of supporting evidence. After the Supreme Court remanded, he was still acquitted, and it was confirmed in 2014. The Control Yuan also questioned during the investigation that the evidence and reinforcement standards of different defendants in the same case were different.

The prosecutors accused that year that after Rio Tinto Construction obtained the list of selection committee members for the Nangang Exhibition Hall, chairman Guo Quanqing instructed special assistant Huang Wei'an and general manager Cai Shangqing to contact the judges separately. Among them, Zhou Jiapeng was accused of Cai Shangqing paying 500,000 yuan each as "front money" and "backward gratitude" before and after Rio Tinto won the bid, totaling 1 million yuan.

Please read on...

The High Court held in the first instance that although Cai Shangqing testified that he twice paid bribes to Zhou Jiapeng, he was a witness who had benefited from a reduced sentence or exemption from punishment in accordance with the Witness Protection Act, and his testimony must be supported by supporting evidence. Although Guo Quanqing testified that he had instructed Cai and Huang to pay bribes, he could not confirm whether the money was actually delivered to the judges. Huang Wei'an also did not see Cai pay the money with his own eyes, which is not enough to prove that Zhou Jiapeng actually accepted bribes.

The prosecutor also submitted Rio Tinto expenditure subpoenas, payment application forms and restaurant invoices to prove that Cai Shangqing had dined with Zhou Jiapeng. However, the court held that "eating" did not mean "paying money." The relevant information could not prove that Cai Shangqing had paid bribes at the alleged restaurant.

In addition, although Rio Tinto had internal expenses related to the Nangang Exhibition Hall, it could not be confirmed whether it was the advance payment or back payment to Zhou. No abnormal funds that could be linked to the bribes were found in the accounts of Zhou Jiapeng and his family, so the verdict was not guilty.

In contrast, Wang Longchang was accused by Huang Weian of accepting NT$700,000 in "front money" and NT$500,000 in "subsequent gratitude". Although the actual flow of the bribe money could not be found, the original verdict still held that cash bribes were confidential and could not be concluded that no bribes had been accepted just because there was no corresponding cash flow. Wang was eventually sentenced to death in August of the seventh year of his life in 2012.

The Supervisory Yuan questioned the different judgment standards in the two cases

The Supervisory Yuan later compared the two cases and pointed out that in Zhou Jiapeng's case, the company's account books, subpoenas and other materials were not enough to strengthen the briber's testimony and he was acquitted; in the case of Wang Longchang and others, they were found guilty despite the lack of direct evidence to strengthen the case. They questioned the different standards of evidence and reinforcement adopted for different defendants in the same case.

Wang Longchang was finally acquitted after years of running for his life. After the verdict, he expressed special thanks to the legal team led by lawyer Lin Junhong of the Civil Justice Reform Foundation. In particular, the legal team did not charge any fees. The three lawyers Lin Junhong, Luo Kai and Wang Yuyao who are defending Wang this time have been involved in human rights cases for a long time in the past. Among them, Luo Kai is the eldest son of former Executive Yuan spokesman Luo Bingcheng.