What to do if accused of illegally raising funds under banking laws? First, analyze the fundraising targets, compensation, cash flow, and the individual's role.

I. What exactly does Article 29 of the Banking Law prohibit?

Article 29, Paragraph 1 of the Banking Law stipulates:

Unless otherwise provided by law,

Non-bank entities are prohibited from engaging in activities such as accepting deposits, managing trust funds or public property, or handling domestic or foreign exchange transactions.

Therefore, criminal cases under banking law do not only occur in actual banks.

Companies, investment platforms, managers, private teams, and even individuals,

If they are actually engaged in financial activities prohibited by law,

It may still involve banking law.

This is why the real focus of the case is not:

Is the company name a bank?

Instead:

What the company is actually doing.

Other common patterns can be found in [reference].Illegal fundraising, underground money exchange and common illegal practices related to banking laws.

II. What does "receiving deposits" mean?

When most people think of savings,

One might think:

Deposit the money in the bank; agree on the interest rate;

You will receive your principal upon maturity.

However, cases of illegal fundraising usually do not directly state the contract name as:

"deposit".

In practice, it may be used as follows:

Investment; cooperation; loan; equity participation; membership; partnership; management on behalf of others; asset management;

Product Plan

Different names, etc.

That's why the Banking Act has an additional Article 29-1.

Its function is to prevent the circumvention of deposit-receiving regulations by simply changing the name of the contract.

III. Article 29-1 of the Banking Act: What is called "investment" may also be considered as receiving deposits.

Article 29-1 of the Banking Law stipulates:

by:

Borrowing money; receiving investment; making someone a shareholder;

or under other names,

Towards:

Most people or unspecified people

Receiving money or absorbing funds,

and:

Agreed upon or to pay dividends, interest, shares or other compensation that are manifestly disproportionate to the principal.

those,

Legally:

It is considered as receiving deposits.

Therefore, we cannot rely on just one contract to conclude:

"It says 'investment' on it, not 'deposit'."

What we really need to see is:

Economic substance.

IV. What are the minimum issues that Article 29-1 of the Banking Act should be broken down into?

It can be broken down into four layers first.

V. What is the biggest difference between general investment and illegal fundraising?

This is not determined by just one factor.

Genuine business investment can always exist:

High returns; high risk; multiple investors;

The company raised funds.

Therefore, it cannot be seen:

There are many investors.

They can simply assume that the banking law is valid.

Similarly, it cannot be seen:

"The pay is very high."

The criminal determination should be completed immediately.

Major cases typically require comprehensive investigation:

Do investors bear real business risks? Is the principal guaranteed to be returned? Are returns linked to operating results? Are funds invested in actual business operations? Do they have genuine shareholder rights? Do investors participate in or bear profits and losses?

And how the company will explain the plan to the outside world.

therefore:

Investment failure ≠ illegal fundraising.

but:

A well-written investment agreement does not necessarily mean it is not an illegal fundraising scheme.

6. Is "guaranteed principal" the most important evidence of illegal fundraising?

It may be very important.

However, the case cannot be narrowed down to:

"Did it mention guaranteeing the principal?"

For example, if the plan explicitly states:

The principal will be returned; fixed monthly returns will be paid.

Regardless of the company's profit or loss, payments are made on schedule.

This could certainly increase the risks associated with banking laws.

But we should still include:

Complete contract; briefing; business statement; LINE group; actual payment method; company operations;

Investor understanding

Let's check together.

Because what criminal cases really need to determine is:

Does the overall plan fall under Article 29-1 of the Banking Law?

7. What is meant by "a return that is clearly disproportionate to the principal"?

Article 29-1 of the Banking Act does not apply to:

"High pay"

Three words.

The legal text is:

Bonuses, interest, dividends or other compensation that are disproportionate to the principal.

therefore:

Interest

It does not necessarily mean that it is a crime.

There are dividends

It does not necessarily mean that it is a crime.

The real analysis to be done:

Principal; Rate of return; Payment frequency; Period; Market environment; Business risks; Principal arrangements; Actual investment model;

And whether the overall plan resembles the nature of absorbing social capital.

A legal judgment cannot be automatically made simply by taking an annualized percentage.

8. If you only collect money from friends and relatives, will there still be the problem of "the majority of people or unspecified people"?

Cannot be used alone:

"They're all friends."

That concludes the analysis.

For example, you might only have a few friends at the beginning.

But later:

Friends refer more friends; investors join LINE groups; business is continuously being recruited; referrers can earn commissions;

Anyone who meets the requirements can participate.

At this point, the actual fundraising scope may be completely different from the initial one.

Therefore, it should be sorted out:

How each fund provider knew the company; who introduced them; when they joined; the contract version; the amount invested; and the compensation terms.

Should I introduce other people?

The fundraising network itself is important evidence.

9. Why can't we only look at the total number of investors in the end when considering "the majority" and "unspecified people"?

Because of how many people ultimately remitted the money.

It's just a result.

The case still needs to be reviewed:

Fundraising process.

For example:

It was originally intended for one-on-one negotiations with a specific group of investors.

and:

We continue to raise funds through websites, information sessions, and public social media.

The factual structures are not the same.

Similarly,

If the business team can continue to expand outwards

This could also lead to different legal evaluations.

Therefore, a:

List of investor sources.

List:

Who introduced whom; when did they join; who recruited them; is there a commission?

Is there any public promotion?

10. Does the fact that a company is actually operating necessarily mean it will not be subject to banking regulations?

uncertain.

For example, the company actually has:

Real estate; technology; virtual asset trading; catering; energy; overseas investment;

Other real business transactions

It cannot be solely because:

"The company does indeed do business."

That would completely exclude banking laws.

The prosecution may argue:

The business is real.

However, the method of raising funds is still illegal.

Therefore, a defense cannot rely solely on:

Company photos; office;

Turnover

Let's just say the case is definitely not valid.

What really needs to be proven is:

Whether the actual business model is the same as the money-making model described by the prosecution.

11. Conversely, a company's eventual bankruptcy does not necessarily mean it was illegally raising funds from the beginning.

The company may be due to:

Market failure; economic downturn; investment mistakes; cash flow problems; customer bankruptcies; policy changes;

Business failure

Unable to fulfill the contract.

Criminal cases cannot rely solely on:

"In the end, they didn't pay back the money."

Working backwards:

"It was an illegal fundraising scheme from the very beginning."

It is also not because:

Investors suffered huge losses.

They skipped the elements required by Article 29-1 of the Banking Act.

Investment losses can be part of the case background.

but:

Loss is not a substitute for the elements of a crime.

12. Can a salesperson become a defendant in banking law simply by introducing investment information based on company materials?

possible.

Large-scale money-grabbing schemes often involve more than just those in charge.

The prosecutors and investigators may simultaneously interview:

Business supervisor; salesperson; referrer; finance staff; administrative staff;

Investors.

However, not everyone who introduced an investment bears the same criminal responsibility as the person in charge.

Need to be confirmed separately:

Do you know the complete fundraising model? Do you know how the compensation works? Do you know the principal arrangement? Do you repeatedly solicit funds? Do you collect commissions? Do you manage other businesses? Do you participate in presentations? Do you handle contracts?

Whether or not to participate in funding.

Criminal liability must be individualized.Can simply introducing investments or receiving commissions lead to being sued under banking law?"It is still necessary to return to the judgment based on the individual's subjective perception, actual behavior, and individual evidence."

13. Does receiving a commission necessarily make one a co-perpetrator?

It's not just about looking:

"Did you receive a commission?"

Commissions could be important evidence in the investigation.

However, confirmation is still required:

What kind of behavior corresponds to the commission? How much did the individual know about it? Was there continuous solicitation? Was there any intent to commit a joint crime?

Whether or not to participate in the overall plan.

If it's just:

I was introduced to a friend by chance.

and:

Their job was to solicit investments and receive commissions based on the amount raised.

The reality may be very different.

Therefore, it is best to prepare a case:

The solicitation and commission table for each business.

14. Must the person in charge of company registration bear full responsibility for illegal fundraising?

uncertain.

The company's nominal head is, of course, a very important subject of investigation.

However, confirmation is still needed:

Who designs the plan; who determines the returns; who manages the funds; who controls the accounts; who recruits business; who approves payments;

Who will make this public?

Some companies are highly concentrated.

In some companies, different people may actually be in charge of different parts.

so:

Professional titles are a form of evidence, but they cannot replace actual criminal acts.

15. Could the investors themselves also become defendants in the banking law?

Simply investing funds,

This role is usually different from the one that involves operating or attracting funds.

But what if an investor later starts:

External recruitment; team building; commission collection; payment collection; investment contract arrangement;

Assist in managing fundraising,

The roles may change.

Therefore, we cannot simply use:

"He is also an investor."

or:

"He took the money."

Judged separately.

What you really need to see:

What was actually done?

16. How weighty is Article 125 of the Banking Law?

According to Article 125, Paragraph 1 of the current Banking Act,

Violation of Article 29, Paragraph 1:

Imprisonment for not less than three years but not more than ten years

And obtained both subjects:

Fines ranging from NT$10 million to NT$200 million.

if:

The amount of money or property obtained through crime exceeds NT$100 million.

The statutory penalty is then increased to:

7 years or more imprisonment

And obtained both subjects:

Fines ranging from NT$25 million to NT$500 million.

Therefore, once a banking law case is filed...

The criminal risks are usually very high.

but:

The severity of the punishment also means that the amount of money involved in the crime and the elements constituting the crime must be handled precisely.

17. Does an investor's total remittance amount exceeding 100 million yuan necessarily qualify for a period of seven years or more?

You can't just draw an equal sign.

Article 125 of the Banking Law uses:

Property or property benefits obtained through crime.

This and:

Total amount remitted by investors; total amount of contracts; total amount of inflows into the company account;

Total amount of all transactions

They are not necessarily exactly the same.

In major cases, it must be confirmed that:

What is the prosecution calculating? Which funds fall under the scope of the case? Are different periods related to the same crime? How are different defendants classified? Are funds that are repeatedly deposited and withdrawn counted twice?

And how exactly is "property or property benefit obtained through crime" defined in law?

The issue of 100 million yuan is not just about sentencing; it could directly change the range of statutory penalties.

18. If a company receives 1 billion yuan, does that mean the person in charge has obtained 1 billion yuan through criminal activities?

uncertain.

At least the following distinctions should be made:

Company receipts; total transaction amount; total amount raised; refunds; remuneration payments; benefits obtained by the defendant; benefits obtained by others;

Property or property benefits obtained through crime as defined by law.

These figures have different legal meanings.

One cannot be:

Summary of all investor remittances

It shall be directly regarded as the proceeds of crime of each defendant.

19. Why is it mandatory to create a cash flow diagram in banking law cases?

Because case files often contain:

Hundreds or even thousands of remittances.

Read page by page, focusing only on bank accounts.

It is easy to lose the overall structure.

At least:

Investment funds inflow

Who will contribute?

when?

Which account should I transfer the money to?

Outflow of compensation

Who receives the interest, bonuses, or dividends?

Refund

When will the principal be returned?

commission

Who receives the commission for attracting customers?

Company expenses

Is the money actually being invested in operations?

Related companies

Should I transfer to another company?

Stack them all up,

Only then can we understand the true funding model.

20. Does being accused of "using later funds to pay earlier funds" necessarily constitute illegal fundraising or fraud?

This is a very important problem, but it is easily oversimplified.

If the company subsequently receives funds

It was used to pay returns to early investors.

The prosecution may consider it as incriminating evidence.

However, criminal cases still need to be confirmed:

The company's overall revenue sources; actual operating profits; how the cash pool is managed; the basis for compensation payments; accounting records;

The manager's understanding of the financial situation at the time.

We cannot only see:

"A's money was ultimately paid to B."

All other evidence is completely omitted.

But what if the entire plan has no real source of income?

The risks would then be different.

21. Are illegal fundraising and fraud the same thing under the Banking Law?

no.

The banking law focuses on illegal fundraising:

Does it violate financial order regulations?

Operating illegally, including businesses that are prohibited by law, such as accepting deposits.

Fraud focuses on:

Whether or not one has used deception to trick another into handing over money or property.

One possible investment plan:

It involves banking law but does not necessarily constitute fraud; it may also be subject to both banking law and fraud charges by the prosecution.

Or it may only involve general civil investment disputes.

Cannot be seen:

Investors lose money

Just:

Banking law, fraud, breach of contract

Everything is mixed up into one thing.

22. When receiving notification from the Investigation Bureau in a banking law case, what is the most important thing in the first statement taken?

The first question is usually not:

Should I deny everything?

Instead:

Who am I in the whole pattern?

Person in charge?

business?

Introducer?

finance?

administrative?

Investors?

The investigator may be holding:

Group chat; company briefing; remittance; contracts; commissions;

Business List

Ask each item one by one.

If you haven't first clarified your job and information scope,

It's very easy:

Answering for others; guessing company finances; claiming to know things you don't know;

Or make unnecessary guesses about the timing or amount.

Complex cash flow issues may require documentation for confirmation.

We shouldn't just rely on memories from many years ago to guess.

For relevant investigation procedures, please refer to [link/reference].Company executives summoned by the investigation bureau or company searchedThe key points of evidence collection and processing.

23. The worst thing a company should do after being searched.

If the case has already entered the search phase

don't want:

Delete LINE groups; delete emails; modify investment reports; rewrite old contracts; backdate documents; require sales staff to give uniform answers; convene all defendants to discuss the transcripts;

Hide the company documents.

These actions may lead to additional charges in the case:

Destroying evidence; fabricating evidence;

Detention

Risks, etc.

Save first:

Search warrants; list of seized items; subpoenas; existing contracts; original investment documents; groups; bank information;

Company ledgers.

24. Why might a banking law case enter into a detention procedure?

Large-scale illegal fundraising cases typically involve the procedural risks associated with banking law cases; see reference [link/reference needed].A complete compilation of the provisions on detention, custody, and bail under the Banking Law.

Many investors; many defendants; hierarchical structure within the company; complex financial transactions; massive electronic data; serious criminal penalties;

Even overseas funds

Features such as...

The prosecution may therefore argue that:

Evidence tampering; evidence destruction;

escape.

but:

Banking law cases do not necessarily require detention.

Further analysis is still needed:

What documents have been seized? Which investors have been questioned? Can the company's accounts be directly accessed by the bank? Have mobile phones and computers been seized? Does the defendant still have the ability to control employees? Is there any specific evidence of escape?

And whether alternative measures such as security, residence restrictions, and restrictions on leaving the country or going to sea can be used.

Criminal detention and release on bail.

25. Is confessing during an investigation always more advantageous?

It cannot be generalized.

Article 125-4 of the Banking Lawright:

Surrender; confess during the investigation;

And automatically surrender all proceeds of crime

There are specific provisions for sentence reduction or exemption.

But should one admit to committing a crime?

It is a major criminal strategy.

Must be confirmed first:

What exactly did the defendant do? What was the scope of the crime? How was the proceeds of the crime determined? Were there any co-defendants? Are there any genuine grounds for acquittal?

And what impact the confession will have on other legal liabilities.

We cannot only see:

"Confession can reduce sentence"

First, admit to all the charges brought by the prosecution.

Similarly,

If the evidence is already very clear

One should not ignore the legal system of sentence reduction simply because one wants to assert innocence.

The strategy must be based on a complete analysis of the case files.

26. Six Types of Materials Most Worth Organizing in Banking Law Cases

If you are already under investigation, you can first organize your thoughts:

1. Investment/Loan Agreement

All versions are retained.

2. External briefings and advertisements

In particular, how are the returns, principal, and risks explained?

3. Source of Investors

Who introduced whom?

4. Bank cash flow

Principal, earnings, refunds, commissions, and operating expenses.

5. Company's actual operations

Revenue sources, investment targets, costs, and actual business.

6. Individual Role

What exactly did I do, know, and decide?

These six types of information are often more valuable than a single document:

How much money did the company raise?

It allows for a more genuine understanding of the case.

27. A "Defendant Role Matrix" should be created for defense in banking law.

Large-scale cases usually involve many people.

At least separate:

Company head; actual operator; financial manager; business manager; salesperson; introducer; administrative staff; account holder;

Investors.

List each person separately:

Whether a plan is designed; whether revenue is determined; whether recruitment is conducted; how many people are recruited; whether commissions are collected; whether funds are controlled; whether payment is involved;

Do you know the full mode?

This can be avoided:

The company is accused of illegally raising funds.

Finally, it becomes:

"Everyone in the company committed the crime together."

28. A truly effective legal defense for banking is not simply stating, "This is a normal investment."

If the prosecution already has:

Large number of investors; fixed income; group recruitment; commission system; company account;

Capital inflow

Just say:

"This is an investment."

This is usually insufficient to handle the case.

Further answers are required:

What risks do investors bear?

What happens to the principal?

Source of revenue?

What does the company actually do?

Why is the compensation designed this way?

How are the target beneficiaries selected?

To what extent was the defendant involved?

What banking law defense really needs to address is:

The entire funding model.

29. Conversely, we cannot abandon item-by-item analysis simply because the prosecution calls it a "money-sucking group."

Major financial criminal cases easily yield a complete tag after a search:

"An illegal money-making group."

But the case file may contain:

Different companies; different investment plans; different periods; different compensation; different businesses;

Different defendants.

Therefore, it still needs to be dismantled:

Which option?

Which period?

Which group of investors?

Which account?

Which defendant?

You can't package all people, all amounts of money, and all transactions into a single crime story.

30. How does Fidelity Law Firm handle banking law and major financial criminal cases?

Major banking law cases typically require understanding the following:

Financial regulations; criminal proceedings; company operations; contracts; bank transactions; accounting records;

And multiple people's documents.

When handling banking law and major financial criminal cases, Fidelity Law Firm will first:

Fundraising model; Investor sources; Contracts and compensation; Actual operations; Bank cash flow;

Personal role

refresh.

Then compare them one by one:

Article 29 of the Banking Act; Article 29-1; Article 125;

And other criminal provisions that may be involved.

Attorney Li Yusheng, formerly the legal director of a large accounting firm, would review company transactions, financial accounting, contracts, and cash flow data when handling major corporate financial criminal cases, rather than judging cases based on a single legal provision or record.

If the case involves intertwined corporate and other financial regulations, further information is available.Defense in Major Financial Criminal Cases and Securities Exchange Law,as well asCorporate Criminal and White-Collar Criminal LawyersThe service.

31. FDLAW also has experience in major corporate finance criminal cases where the defendant was acquitted on appeal.

Fidelity Law Firm also has a case where a major corporate finance criminal case resulted in a guilty verdict in the first instance, but the Taiwan High Court overturned the original judgment and acquitted the defendant in the second instance.

This case mainly involves:

Company law; Commercial accounting law;

And criminal liability related to company registration,

This is not a banking law case.

However, this case reveals a common characteristic of major corporate financial criminal cases:

The company's transactions, bank statements, shareholder dealings, financial data, and every legal requirement must be reorganized.

We cannot accept a single criminal interpretation based solely on the superficial flow of funds.

This case is not a banking law case.Cases of acquittals on appeal in cases involving company law and commercial accounting law.

Past case outcomes do not guarantee that other cases will receive the same verdict.

What truly needs to be debated in banking law cases is the entire fundraising model.

Major banking law cases cannot be answered by simply asking:

How much money did the company actually receive?

What truly needs rebuilding is:

Who designed the plan; who solicited funds from whom; how was the contract written; what were the actual terms; how were compensation promised; did the company actually operate; where did the money ultimately go;

What did each defendant actually do?

when:

Target investors; contracts; compensation; operations; cash flow;

Personal role

All of them are placed in the same case structure.

Only then can we truly make a judgment:

This is a legitimate investment or loan.

This is illegal fundraising as defined in Article 29-1 of the Banking Law.

Different participants should receive completely different criminal evaluations.

If you have received a notice from the Investigation Bureau, a summons from the District Attorney's Office, or your company has been searched, you should first clarify your role and main financial patterns, and then prepare your first statement, evidence preservation after the search, and possible detention procedures.