When the owner of a trademark, copyright or any other intellectual property files a criminal complaint for trademark, copyright or any other IPR infringements with the criminal division of a court, he/she will usually initiate a civil suit collateral to such a criminal action for damage claims so as to avoid the litigation fees.

According to the Code of Criminal Procedure, if a court decides that the defendant of a criminal case is either not guilty or exempted from prosecution, or the criminal case is rejected, the owner of a trademark, copyright or any other intellectual property, in order to prevent the civil suit collateral to the criminal case from being dismissed, may require the collateral civil action to be heard by the civil division of the court. However, the Intellectual Property Court (IP Court) dismissed the application for transferring the collateral civil action to be heard by the civil division of a court and also rejected the claim of civil damages according to the Intellectual Property Case Adjudication Act in a copyright infringement case in 2012, while the defendant of the copyright infringement criminal case was held not guilty.

The IP Court points out that according to the Code of Criminal Procedure, if in the criminal proceedings, the court holds a judgment of "not guilty" or "exemption from prosecution" or "rejection of the case", the court should not dismiss the civil action collateral to such criminal proceedings filed by the plaintiff, and should transfer the collateral civil action to the civil division of a court for trial upon the plaintiff's request. However, the Intellectual Property Case Adjudication Act should prevail over the Code of Criminal Procedure for trial of the intellectual property disputes. According to the Intellectual Property Case Adjudication Act, when the defendant is found not guilty, the civil claim should be directly rejected without transferring the civil case to the civil division of the court for trial.

The Taichung District Court has cited and adopted the same position as the IP Court in other similar situation of a trademark infringement case later in 2012 and rejected the application of transferring the civil claim to the civil division of the court for trial.

The IP Court's opinion is different from other court's opinion in the past, but such new position has been recognized by other courts as well. This issue should particularly noted.