Administrative Appeal Act Article 97
While one of the following situations is met, the administrative appellant, intervenor appellant or any third party with interest at stake may apply for a review de novo against an irrevocable and conclusive administrative appeal decision to the agency with jurisdiction of administrative appeal, except that she/he has already pleaded the cause(s) in an administrative litigation or failed to plead in spite of her/his learning the cause(s):1. While it is obvious that Laws and Regulations have been applied in mistake.2. While it is obvious that the reasons of an administrative appeal decision are inconsistent with the holding thereof.3. While the agency with jurisdiction of administrative appeal was not constituted as stipulated by law.4. While the commissioner(s) who participated in the administrative appeal decision shall be defaulted according to Acts or Regulations .5. While a commissioner(s) who participated in the administrative appeal decision committed a criminal offense relating to his official duties in connection with the administrative appeal.6. While an administrative appeal representative committed a crime in connection with the administrative appeal, which is punishable by the Criminal Law and affected the administrative appeal decision.7. While an evidence has been used as the bases of the administrative appeal decision is found to be forged or fraudulently altered.8. While a witness, an examiner or an interpreter on whose testimony, examine opinion has be used as the bases of the administrative appeal decision has been proved punishable by perjury;9. While a civil, criminal or administrative litigation judgment or administrative action on which the administrative appeal decision was based has been altered.10. While an evidence which was not taken into consideration or was not been used as the basis has been discovered after the decision has been made.A request for review de novo stipulated in last Paragraph shall be instituted within 30 days.The period stipulated in last Paragraph calculates from the time when the administrative appeal decision becomes irrevocable and conclusive except the cause of review de novo happened or was known until after the administrative appeal decision has become irrevocable and conclusive, the period calculates from the time when the cause of review de novo was known.
中文原文 訴願法第97條
於有左列各款情形之一者,訴願人、參加人或其他利害關係人得對於確定訴願決定,向原訴願決定機關申請再審。
但訴願人、參加人或其他利害關係人已依行政訴訟主張其事由或知其事由而不為主張者,不在此限:
一、適用法規顯有錯誤者。
二、決定理由與主文顯有矛盾者。
三、決定機關之組織不合法者。
四、依法令應迴避之委員參與決定者。
五、參與決定之委員關於該訴願違背職務,犯刑事上之罪者。
六、訴願之代理人,關於該訴願有刑事上應罰之行為,影響於決定者。
七、為決定基礎之證物,係偽造或變造者。
八、證人、鑑定人或通譯就為決定基礎之證言、鑑定為虛偽陳述者。
九、為決定基礎之民事、刑事或行政訴訟判決或行政處分已變更者。
十、發見未經斟酌之證物或得使用該證物者。
前項聲請再審,應於三十日內提起。
前項期間,自訴願決定確定時起算。
但再審之事由發生在後或知悉在後者,自知悉時起算。
但訴願人、參加人或其他利害關係人已依行政訴訟主張其事由或知其事由而不為主張者,不在此限:
一、適用法規顯有錯誤者。
二、決定理由與主文顯有矛盾者。
三、決定機關之組織不合法者。
四、依法令應迴避之委員參與決定者。
五、參與決定之委員關於該訴願違背職務,犯刑事上之罪者。
六、訴願之代理人,關於該訴願有刑事上應罰之行為,影響於決定者。
七、為決定基礎之證物,係偽造或變造者。
八、證人、鑑定人或通譯就為決定基礎之證言、鑑定為虛偽陳述者。
九、為決定基礎之民事、刑事或行政訴訟判決或行政處分已變更者。
十、發見未經斟酌之證物或得使用該證物者。
前項聲請再審,應於三十日內提起。
前項期間,自訴願決定確定時起算。
但再審之事由發生在後或知悉在後者,自知悉時起算。