Table of Contents
Toggle17 years. This is the sentence handed down by the Taipei District Court this afternoon to former Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je in the first instance, along with a 6-year deprivation of his civil rights.
The prosecution sought a sentence of 28 years and 6 months, but the court sentenced him to 17 years—a 40% reduction. The numbers themselves speak for themselves: this was not an acquittal due to "political persecution," nor was it a symbolic leniency. A 17-year prison sentence is enough to completely wipe out a politician's public life.
Verdict: The sentence was reduced by 60%, but still sufficient to be fatal.
Judge Chiang Chun-yen, in delivering the verdict, found Ko Wen-je guilty of the core crimes related to the Jinghua City floor area ratio scandal, sentencing him to 17 years in prison and depriving him of his civil rights for 6 years. Compared to the Taipei District Prosecutors Office's request for a sentence of 28 years and 6 months, the court's sentence was significantly lower than the prosecution's expectations, but still far higher than the defense's claim for acquittal.
The previous prediction by the legal community that "if the bribery charge is established, the sentence could be up to 20 years" is roughly in line with the previous prediction. Former Judge Yeh Yu-hung and former Chief Prosecutor Ho Tsu-shun both estimated the combined sentence to be about 20 years before sentencing. The actual result was slightly lower but still in the same range.
The core controversy surrounding the Jinghua City case: How did the plot ratio soar from 560% to 840%?
During the redevelopment of the former Jinghua City Shopping Center into the "Jinghua Plaza" commercial and office building, the floor area ratio (FAR) climbed from the originally approved 560% to 840%. The 280% increase came from two main channels: a 20% "self-created FAR bonus" and a 30% FAR transfer. Prosecutors determined that this 20% self-created FAR bonus was the key to illegal profiteering—allowing the Weijing Group to obtain over NT$12.1 billion in additional development profits.
The power structure of the entire corruption case is clear: Shen Ching-ching, chairman of the Wei-Ching Group, bribed officials for development benefits; Taipei City Councilor Ying Hsiao-wei held multiple "coordination meetings" to pressure the Taipei City Government and received more than NT$52.5 million in donations from Wei-Ching to a charity association that it effectively controlled, with the funds used to repay mortgages and her daughter's tuition fees; Peng Chen-sheng, then deputy mayor of Taipei City, served as chairman of the Urban Development Committee and is suspected of ignoring dissenting opinions and leading the way in passing floor area ratio bonuses.
Four major crimes, prison sentence 28 years and June
Taipei District Prosecutors Office indicts Ko Wen-je on four charges:
Convicted of accepting bribes in violation of his official duties , prosecutors allege that Ko Wen-je accepted NT$15 million in bribes. Key evidence is a USB drive record containing the entry "2022/11/1 Xiao Shen 1500 Shen Qingjing," which the prosecution interprets as the amount of the bribe. The defense argues that "1500" refers to "meeting at 3 PM." The prosecution seeks a 15-year prison sentence, a fine of NT$50 million, and 10 years of deprivation of civil rights.
Crime of profiteering – suspected of illegally relaxing floor area ratios to allow developers to obtain illegal profits.
Embezzlement of public funds (2 cases) – involving the misappropriation of Taiwan People’s Party political donations to “Muko Company”, which is effectively controlled by Ko Wen-je, and seeking a sentence of 5 years and 6 years respectively.
Breach of trust – Request for a sentence of 2 years and 6 months.
The total proposed sentence is 28 years and 6 months. Ko Wen-je's former secretary, Hsu Chih-yu, has been identified as his "personal accountant," effectively controlling the flow of funds, and is currently detained in Japan and wanted by the police.
The Shadow of Cryptocurrency: The Mystery of "1,500 Bitcoins"
Another aspect of the Core Pacific City case that has garnered significant attention in the cryptocurrency community is the accusation that Ko Wen-je possesses 1,500 Bitcoins. Based on the current Bitcoin price of approximately $72,000, 1,500 BTC would be worth approximately $108 million (about NT$3.5 billion).
However, during the 363-day investigation that led to Ko Wen-je's detention, the prosecution was unable to find any substantial evidence of the Bitcoin. In September 2025, after Ko Wen-je was released on bail of NT$70 million, he publicly clarified outside the district prosecutor's office that the "1,500 Bitcoins" charge was a "complete miscarriage of justice," questioning the Taipei District Prosecutors Office's claim that "they detained me for a year and still couldn't find it."
This case marks the first time cryptocurrency has been formally mentioned in a major political case in Taiwan, highlighting the challenges of tracking digital assets in judicial investigations—even if prosecutors suspect the defendant of holding a large amount of cryptocurrency, they are almost unable to provide evidence in the absence of wallet addresses or exchange KYC records.
Case Timeline
August 12, 2024 – The Taiwan People's Party's false declarations of political donations were exposed, triggering a scandal.
August 28, 2024 – Ying Xiaowei was intercepted at the airport while attempting to fly to Hong Kong.
August 30, 2024 – Prosecutors conduct large-scale searches of Ko Wen-je's residence and the Taiwan People's Party headquarters.
September 5, 2024 – Ko Wen-je was detained and held incommunicado for the first time.
December 26, 2024 – Investigation concluded, Taipei District Prosecutors Office formally indicted, seeking a sentence of 28 years and 6 months.
September 5, 2025 – Ko Wen-je was released on bail of NT$70 million after serving 363 days in custody.
September 8, 2025 – Ko Wen-je reported to the District Prosecutor's Office and publicly denied the 1,500 BTC charge.
March 26, 2026 – Taipei District Court delivered its first-instance verdict: 17 years imprisonment and deprivation of civil rights for 6 years.
Led by a "billion-dollar crime buster": The panel of judges
This case was heard by the Taipei District Court's Special Tribunal for Major Financial Cases. The three judges on the panel have a proven track record of handling numerous cases, which has led the legal community to describe them as a "star team."
Judge Chiang Chun-yen (Judicial Officer Class 39) is known as the "Nemesis of Billion-Dollar Crimes," famous for his heavy sentencing style. In the 2016 Happiness Life Insurance embezzlement case, he sentenced defendant Deng Wencong to 28 years—exceeding the prosecution's requested 21 years. In the Runyin loan fraud case, involving a record-breaking NT$47.2 billion, he sentenced the main suspect to 26 and 28 years respectively. More importantly, Chiang Chun-yen was the presiding judge in the im.B cryptocurrency fraud case, where he and Judge Hsu Fang-yu jointly sentenced the main suspect, Zeng Yaofeng, to 16 years and 6 months—the im.B case involved a cryptocurrency fraud amount of NT$2.5 billion, falling under the category of major economic crimes, similar to the Jinghua City case.
Judge Hsu Fang-yu (Judicial Officer Class 52), who was appointed to the Heavy Financial Court in 2022, was the same judge who partnered with Chiang Chun-yen in the im.B case. She also presided over major cases such as the PAX Global Asset Management fraud case and the Hualien Fuli Township mayor bribery case, and her efficient handling of cases is well known in the legal community.
Judge Yang Shih-hsien (55th class of judicial officers) was transferred to the Heavy Gold Court in August 2024. Among the most high-profile cases he has presided over are: the Institute for Information Industry's lawsuit against former Hsinchu Mayor Kao Hung-an for copyright infringement, the personal data leak case of internet celebrity "Chicken Cutlet Girl" Cheng Chia-chun, and Peng Wen-cheng's lawsuit against former President Tsai Ing-wen's lawyer for defamation—all politically sensitive cases with high social attention.
Predictions from the Dharma Realm vs. Actual Result
Before sentencing, former Judge Yeh Yu-hung analyzed that if the bribery charge is upheld, it would absorb the crime of seeking personal gain, and combine it with the charges of misappropriation of public funds and breach of trust, with a potential sentence of up to 20 years. Former Chief Prosecutor Ho Tsu-shun also assessed the sentence to be around 20 years, and pointed out that if a guilty verdict reaches this level, Ko Wen-je would essentially lose his eligibility to run for president in 2028.
The actual outcome of 17 years is slightly shorter than the 20 years predicted by the legal community, but the nature remains the same—the six-year deprivation of civil rights means that even if Ko Wen-je appeals to the second instance, his political rights have been effectively frozen. According to the "Presidential and Vice Presidential Election and Recall Act," if this verdict is upheld, Ko Wen-je will not only be unable to run for president in 2028, but his political influence within the Taiwan People's Party will also come to an end.
17 Years Later: A Reshuffling of Taiwan's Political Landscape
From a sober perspective, the impact of the 2017 verdict on Taiwan's political scene was structural. As Taiwan's third-largest political force, the Taiwan People's Party, facing a severe sentence for its founding chairman, will soon face the dual pressures of internal party divisions and a loss of supporters.
Ko Wen-je is expected to appeal to the second instance court. However, overturning the verdict on appeal is extremely difficult—previous cases involving judge Chiang Chun-yen show that his judgments have a fairly stable upheld rate on appeals. More importantly, regardless of the outcome of the second instance, the political effect of the first instance's retrial alone is enough to reshape the competitive landscape of the 2026 local elections and the 2028 presidential election.
As for the "1,500 BTC" case that has garnered attention in the cryptocurrency community, this nearly two-year-long unsolved case ultimately ended with the prosecution failing to provide evidence. The lesson it leaves behind is not whether Ko Wen-je actually held Bitcoin, but rather: when digital assets become tools for political maneuvering, is the judicial system capable of discerning the distance between facts and accusations?
