On 23 February 2007, the prosecution closed its investigation. According to the indictment, Ma Ying Nine was accused of "taking advantage of his position to defraud property", and according to the Corruption Offences Ordinance, the total amount of corruption proceeds was determined to be NT$1176,200. Yu Wen, the former secretary of Taipei City, was found to be suspected of embezzling 760,000 yuan and charged with embezzlement and forgery of documents. In addition, Liao Li, Li Keqi, Sun, Fang, Zhang Junlun and other staff members of the Municipal People's Congress were suspended from prosecution.
On April 3, the Taipei court held its first session. Ma Ying IX stated his defense intention as a "defendant", including writing off the special expenses with receipts from the beginning, which was not public funds, and he did not "retract his confession" during the prosecution's interrogation.
On April 17, the prosecution and the defense made a list of evidence, and the witness confessed that the evidence was used for offensive and defensive purposes.
On May 8, the collegiate bench of the Taipei court ruled that the contents of the consultation issued by the Ministry of Justice, the interview with Zhongtian News on September 7 last year, Taipei City Councillor Yan September 18, and the testimony of witnesses such as Liao Li, director of the Ninth Office, were all evidence.
On May 22nd, the collegial panel of the Taipei court ruled that Zhang et al. 14 witnesses, former vice chairman of the Executive Yuan, should be summoned for prosecution and defense.
On June 5, Zhang appeared in court, and the trial was full of gunpowder. The public prosecutor suspects that witnesses, defendants and lawyers collude in advance; When lawyers respond to the implementation of the pre-trial system, it is necessary for both the prosecution and the defense to contact the witness to find out how much the witness knows about the evidence facts.
On July 3, the Taipei court summoned Sun Fang and Sun, three former secretaries of the mayor's period, to testify in court.
On July 10, the Taipei court summoned Liu, Wu and three former cashiers of the Taipei Municipal Government Secretariat to handle special fees. Among them, when Wu answered the lawyer's cross-examination, he mentioned that "the prosecution's transcript failed to completely record her statement", so the lawyer asked the collegial panel to consult the CD of the prosecution's interrogation.
On July 19, this newspaper extracted the contents of the CD-ROM interrogation transcript of the prosecution, which triggered a controversy about "making false transcripts". The actions of the prosecution and the defense fought with each other outside the court.
On July 23, the collegial panel of the Taipei court consulted the CD in court. The presiding judge told Wu that the verdict would explain the dispute over the prosecution's testimony record.
On July 24th, the Taipei court presented relevant securities. Including oral evidence of 29 prosecution witnesses and 36 non-oral evidence.
On July 3 1 day, the debate in Taipei court ended. In the prosecution stage, the prosecution added the provisions of the charges and included the crime of official breach of trust. I hope the collegial panel will consider whether Ma Ying IX is involved in the crime of official breach of trust and increase his sentence to half.
On August 14, the Taipei court acquitted Ma Ying.
On August 30th, the prosecutors in Taipei published a 38-page appeal with more than 20,000 words, which was sent to the Taipei court and forwarded to the "High Court" in Taiwan Province Province for appeal. The prosecution cited 19 reasons for appeal, and concluded that Ma Ying's failure to pay the special expenses in accordance with the regulations, knowing that they were public funds, constituted the crime of official breach of trust and was a recidivist, and should be given heavier punishment according to law. This is completely different from the attitude that the prosecution hoped to get a lighter sentence before the first trial of the Ma Ying Nine Special Expenses case.
On September 3, the "High Court" of Taiwan Province completed the second trial by computer lottery, and formed a collegial panel to start the second trial of the Ma Ying-Ma Ying-jeou special fee case.
10 12, the "High Court" of Taiwan Province Province held a preparatory court and summoned Ma Ying IX to appear in court for the first time.
1 1 On February 2nd, the "High Court" of Taiwan Province Province held an entity hearing. In addition to summoning the defendant Ma Ying Jiu to appear in court, Liu Bi 'e, the special fee handler, and Shi Sumei, the accounting office of the Taipei Municipal Government, were also summoned as witnesses. Both the prosecution and the defense conducted an interactive cross-examination procedure to summon witnesses according to their respective applications, and the attack and defense were fierce.
1 1 October 30th, the "High Court" of Taiwan Province Province held the last debate session of the second instance, and Ma Ying IX appeared in court. The prosecutor finally argued that the special expenses are public funds and should be used for public purposes. Ma Ying Nine is suspected of defrauding/KLOC-a special fee of more than 0/000 million yuan (NT); Ma Ying Jiu's defense lawyer said that Ma Ying Jiu had no intention of corruption or crime. After the court debate, the collegial panel informed that the verdict would be pronounced at1on the morning of February 28th 10.