Patent Act Article 97-3
Border measures: compensation and return of securityIf a court of law in a final and binding judgment has held that the detained articles do not infringe the patent right(s), the detention requester shall be liable to compensate the owner of the detained articles for the loss incurred from such detention or from providing the security as prescribed in Paragraph 4 of Article 97-1.The detention requester enjoys the same right as a pledgee regarding the security as prescribed in Paragraph 4 of Article 97-1; the owner of the detained articles enjoys the same right as a pledgee regarding the security as prescribed in Paragraph 2 of Article 97-1. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the relevant costs including demurrage, warehousing, loading, and unloading as prescribed in Paragraph 4 of the preceding article and Paragraph 6 of Article 97-1 shall be paid prior to compensation for the loss suffered by the detention requester or the owner of the detained articles.In case of any of the following, Customs shall, upon request from the detention requester, return the security as prescribed in Paragraph 2 of Article 97-1:1. the security is no longer required as a final and binding court judgment has been rendered in favor of the detention requester or the detention requester has reached a settlement with the owner of the detained articles;2. where the owner of the detained articles has suffered loss due to a repeal of detention in accordance with Subparagraphs 1 through 4, Paragraph 1 of the preceding article, or where a final and binding court judgment has been rendered in favor of the owner of the detained articles, the detention requester proves that the owner of the detained articles has been notified to exercise the right within a specified time period of no less than twenty (20) days but the owner of the detained articles has yet to do so within the said period; or3. the owner of the detained articles has agreed upon such return.In case of any of the following, Customs shall, upon request from the owner of the detained articles, return the security as prescribed in Paragraph 4 of Article 97-1:1. the security is no longer required as the detention has been repealed in accordance with Subparagraphs 1 through 4, Paragraph 1 of the preceding article, or a settlement has been reached between the owner of the detained articles and the detention requester;2. where a final and binding court judgment has been rendered in favor of the detention requester, the owner of the detained articles proves that the detention requester has been notified to exercise the right within a specified time period of no less than twenty (20) days but the detention requester has yet to do so within the said period; or3. the detention requester has agreed upon such return.
中文原文 專利法第97-3條
查扣物經法院確定判決不屬侵害專利權之物者，申請人應賠償被查扣人因查扣或提供第九十七條之一第四項規定保證金所受之損害。
申請人就第九十七條之一第四項規定之保證金，被查扣人就第九十七條之一第二項規定之保證金，與質權人有同一權利。
但前條第四項及第九十七條之一第六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。
有下列情形之一者，海關應依申請人之申請，返還第九十七條之一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。
有下列情形之一者，海關應依被查扣人之申請，返還第九十七條之一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。
申請人就第九十七條之一第四項規定之保證金，被查扣人就第九十七條之一第二項規定之保證金，與質權人有同一權利。
但前條第四項及第九十七條之一第六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。
有下列情形之一者，海關應依申請人之申請，返還第九十七條之一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。
有下列情形之一者，海關應依被查扣人之申請，返還第九十七條之一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。