Trademark Act Article 74
Release of securityIf a final judgment of the court holds that the detained articles do not infringe trademark rights, the applicant shall compensate the owner of detained articles for injury caused to them through wrongful detention of articles or provision of a security as prescribed in Paragraph 4 of Article 72.The applicant shall enjoy the same right as a pledgee in relation to the security as prescribed in Paragraph 4 of Article 72. The owner of detained articles shall enjoy the same right as a pledgee in relation to the security as prescribed in Paragraph 2 of Article 72. However, all relevant expenses incurred as a result of the delay of containers, warehousing, loading, and unloading of the detained articles as prescribed in Paragraph 4 of the preceding article and Paragraph 5 of Article 72 shall be paid prior to compensate the applicant or the owner of detained articles for injury.Customs shall release the security as prescribed in Paragraph 2 of Article 72 upon request by the applicant in any of the following:(1)Where the security is no longer required as the applicant has either obtained a final judgment in his/her favor or reached a settlement with the owner of detained articles;(2)Where the applicant proves that the owner of detained articles has been notified but failed to exercise his/her rights within twenty days or more after the detention is revoked on the grounds prescribed in Subparagraphs 1 through 4 of Paragraph 1 of the preceding article and hence there is injury caused to them through wrongful detention, or after such owner obtained a final judgment in his/her favor; or(3)Where the owner of detained articles agrees to release the security.Customs shall release the security as prescribed in Paragraph 4 of Article 72 upon request by the owner of detained articles in any of the following:(1)Where the security is no longer required as either after the detention is revoked on the grounds prescribed in Subparagraphs 1 through 4 of Paragraph 1 of the preceding article or such owner has reached a settlement with the applicant;(2)Where such owner proves that the applicant has been notified but failed to exercise his/her rights within twenty days or more after the applicant has obtained a final judgment in his/her favor; or(3)Where the applicant agrees to release the security.
中文原文 商標法第74條
查扣物經法院確定判決不屬侵害商標權之物者，申請人應賠償被查扣人因查扣或提供第七十二條第四項規定保證金所受之損害。
申請人就第七十二條第四項規定之保證金，被查扣人就第七十二條第二項規定之保證金，與質權人有同一之權利。
但前條第四項及第七十二條第五項規定之貨櫃延滯費、倉租、裝卸費等有關費用，優先於申請人或被查扣人之損害受償。
有下列情形之一，海關應依申請人之申請，返還第七十二條第二項規定之保證金：
一、申請人取得勝訴之確定判決，或與被查扣人達成和解，已無繼續提供保證金之必要者。
二、因前條第一項第一款至第四款規定之事由廢止查扣，致被查扣人受有損害後，或被查扣人取得勝訴之確定判決後，申請人證明已定二十日以上之期間，催告被查扣人行使權利而未行使者。
三、被查扣人同意返還者。
有下列情形之一，海關應依被查扣人之申請返還第七十二條第四項規定之保證金：
一、因前條第一項第一款至第四款規定之事由廢止查扣，或被查扣人與申請人達成和解，已無繼續提供保證金之必要者。
二、申請人取得勝訴之確定判決後，被查扣人證明已定二十日以上之期間，催告申請人行使權利而未行使者。
三、申請人同意返還者。
申請人就第七十二條第四項規定之保證金，被查扣人就第七十二條第二項規定之保證金，與質權人有同一之權利。
但前條第四項及第七十二條第五項規定之貨櫃延滯費、倉租、裝卸費等有關費用，優先於申請人或被查扣人之損害受償。
有下列情形之一，海關應依申請人之申請，返還第七十二條第二項規定之保證金：
一、申請人取得勝訴之確定判決，或與被查扣人達成和解，已無繼續提供保證金之必要者。
二、因前條第一項第一款至第四款規定之事由廢止查扣，致被查扣人受有損害後，或被查扣人取得勝訴之確定判決後，申請人證明已定二十日以上之期間，催告被查扣人行使權利而未行使者。
三、被查扣人同意返還者。
有下列情形之一，海關應依被查扣人之申請返還第七十二條第四項規定之保證金：
一、因前條第一項第一款至第四款規定之事由廢止查扣，或被查扣人與申請人達成和解，已無繼續提供保證金之必要者。
二、申請人取得勝訴之確定判決後，被查扣人證明已定二十日以上之期間，催告申請人行使權利而未行使者。
三、申請人同意返還者。