TAIPEI (Taiwan News) — A man surnamed Hsia (夏) who married a high school boy with a NT$500 million (US$15.24 million) inheritance two hours before his death was sentenced to 18 months in prison for a fraudulent marriage.
In the case involving an 18-year-old high school student surnamed Lai (賴), the Taichung Branch of the Taiwan High Court, in the second instance, determined that Hsia entered into a sham marriage with Lai for personal gain. On Thursday, the court dismissed Hsia's appeal and upheld the sentence of 18 months for the crime of causing a public official to make false entries in official documents. The ruling is final, per CNA.
The indictment by the Taichung District Prosecutors Office in Taiwan said that Hsia's father was a land administration agent, and Hsia served as his assistant. On Jan. 5, 2023, Lai's father signed a real estate donation contract, transferring real estate worth NT$500 million under his name to his son.
Hsia and his father served as witnesses to the transaction. It was at this time that Hsia became acquainted with the junior Lai.
During his father's hospitalization in early April 2023, Lai, the son of his father's second wife, feared his father's first spouse would contest the ownership of the real estate. Therefore, he entrusted the property ownership documents to Hsia's father for safekeeping.
After the elder Lai passed away on April 23 of the same year, his first wife blocked the placement of his memorial tablet at the residence for worship, further intensifying Lai's anxiety about inheritance.
At 6 a.m. on May 4, 2023, Hsia brought a pre-prepared same-sex marriage agreement and, under the pretext of discussing property and financial planning, rode his scooter to Lai's residence to invite him out for a conversation.
The two went for a meal at a fast-food restaurant, where Lai expressed his grief over losing his father and his distress over his mother being mistreated at home.
Hsia proposed the two of them formally register a marriage to prevent the elder Lai's first wife from contesting the ownership of the real estate. Trusting Hsia, Lai went with him to the household registration office at around 9 a.m. that day to complete the marriage registration.
They then returned together to Hsia’s residence. At 11:02 a.m., Lai was found to have fallen from the building.
The Taichung District Prosecutors Office concluded there was insufficient evidence to charge Hsia with murder and decided not to prosecute. However, following a request for reconsideration by Lai's family, the Taichung Branch of the High Prosecutors Office remanded the case for further investigation, which is ongoing.
Separately, Hsia was indicted for forgery. In June last year, the Taichung District Court ruled in the first trial, sentencing Hsia to 18 months in prison. Dissatisfied with the verdict, Hsia filed an appeal.
The appeal was reviewed by the Taichung Branch of the Taiwan High Court in the second instance, which found the evidence against Hsia to be clear. The court determined that his criminal motives and intent were rooted in personal gain, exploiting Lai's inexperience and urgent desire to resolve family inheritance disputes, to arranging a sham marriage.
This case involved substantial property interests under Lai's name and severely violated and misused the civil law-based marriage registration system. The court deemed the crime particularly egregious.
The panel of judges deliberated and concluded that the original trial’s fact-finding, legal application, and sentencing were all appropriate. They found no grounds for Hsia’s appeal and dismissed it. The case is now finalized, and since the sentence cannot be commuted to a fine, Hsia must serve his prison term.
In addition, Hsia argued that this case involved a separate murder allegation and requested that the trial be suspended until that matter was resolved. However, the panel ruled that Lai's death by falling was not within the scope of this case, and as the alleged murder case has not yet led to an indictment, it does not meet the criteria under the Code of Criminal Procedure for suspending the trial. Thus, there was no need to halt the proceedings.
