會員的分享

因為喜歡做問卷而加入這網站，原本只是希望能累積點數換東西，沒想到竟然抽到了大獎，實在是太幸運了，完全不敢相信。感謝！我一定會繼續做問卷的！

如何成為會員？

加入會員非常簡單，只要到註冊網頁上填寫您的詳細資料即可，我們會傳送申請表連結給您，讓您確認自己的會員資格，如果您未滿十四歲，需請家長或監護人代您申請並成為會員，然後透過他們參與調查。

2017-04-蘆洲交友1約會103:00

By Chen Wei-han / Staff reporterProtesters who stormed the Executive Yuan during the Sunflower movement in 2014 were yesterday acquitted of inciting others to commit a crime, but some were sentenced for obstructing official business and damaging government property.Following the occupation of the Legislative Yuan by protesters on March 18, 2014, in protest against a hasty review of the cross-strait service trade agreement, a number of protesters broke into the Executive Yuan compound on March 23 and were forcibly evicted by the police.A total of 93 protesters were indicted on various charges, but the number of defendants was reduced to 21 after the Executive Yuan withdrew charges against some protesters.The Taipei District Court acquitted 10 of the defendants, including Dennis Wei （魏揚）, of inciting others to commit a crime and theft.However, eight defendants were found guilty of obstructing official business and three others were found guilty of damaging public property.Those found guilty of obstructing official business were sentenced to three to five months in prison, while those guilty of damaging public property were sentenced to four to five months in prison, with sentences commutable to a fine.Unlike the Taipei District Court ruling on March 31 that acquitted Sunflower protesters occupying the Legislative Yuan compound of all charges and described their actions as “in line with the rights of civil disobedience,” yesterday’s ruling did not recognize such rights — although defendants had cited the right of civil disobedience in their defense.In contrast to the March 31 ruling, the verdict said that breaking into Executive Yuan premises was “not the last relief” protesters could resort to in the existing legal framework, as they could have requested a constitutional interpretation to veto the passage of the cross-strait service trade agreement.The defendants criticized the ruling, saying that all the defendants should be acquitted of all charges for the same reason the court acquitted their fellow protesters who stormed the Legislative Yuan.Wei said protesters’ actions did not constitute the obstruction of official businesses, because they were part of an “impromptu demonstration of immediate urgency,” which, according to Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 718, is legal.Meanwhile, Wei said the judiciary failed to address police violence during the protests.“No one has been held accountable for the state violence. The defendants have had to appear in court on a frequent basis for the past three years, but none of the relevant government officials including [former premier] Jiang Yi-huah （江宜樺） and [Zhongzheng First Police Precinct Chief] Fang Yang-ning （方仰寧） have been investigated,” Wei said.“An injured protester died one year after [the police eviction] and we still do not know which officers used force,” he said.Lawyer Yu Po-hsiang （尤伯祥）, the director of the legal team supporting the defendants, said they regretted the ruling, as the court did not recognize the right of civil disobedience and the context in which protesters exercised that right.“The March 23 incident was an integral part of the Sunflower movement. It was caused by former president Ma Ying-jeou’s （馬英九） abuse of the Constitution and legal system. The two incidents should be treated equally from a legal point of view,” he said.Defendant Hsieh Sheng-yu （謝昇佑）, who was given a four-month prison sentence for obstructing official business, said he did not regret his actions and he would act again if the government’s actions were unjust.The defendants and the legal team have yet to decide whether to appeal the ruling.They also called on the judiciary not to press criminal charges against protesters unless absolutely necessary, as it would suppress freedom of speech.新聞來源：TAIPEI TIMES

旅行 ?貢寮交友>公務員聯誼