It has been held by this Yuan’s Interpretation No. 362 that "the provision of Article 988, Subparagraph 2, of the Civil Code, whereby a bigamous marriage is null and void, is intended to maintain the social order based on the monogamous system, and is generally speaking consistent with the Constitution. However, where a prior marriage is dissolved in consequence of an irrevocable judgment and a third person, in good faith and without negligence, contracts a marriage with one of the parties to the prior marriage in reliance of such judgment, which is subsequently reversed, making the subsequent marriage bigamous, the situation is distinguishable from bigamy in its ordinary sense, and the validity of the subsequent marriage must be maintained on the principle of reliance protection (Vertrauenschutzprinzip). The aforesaid provision of the Civil Code is inadequate in dealing with such a special circumstance as described above and is thus inconsistent with the intent of the Constitution to protect the freedom of marriage, and must be reviewed for the purpose of revision." The so-called "special circumstance" includes bigamous marriages in consequence of divorce by agreement. Nevertheless, as marriage involves change in the relation of personal status, which has to do with the public interest, the parties to the second marriage must be required to meet more stringent tests in respect of their reliance on the dissolution of the prior marriage rather than relying on mere good faith and lack of negligence on the part of the person with whom he or she contracts the second marriage. In order to retain the validity of the second marriage, both parties to such marriage must be found to be in good faith and without fault. Interpretation No. 362 is hereby appended. If it results in such a circumstance that both the first and the second marriages exist in force at the same time, the question of which one of the two marriages should be dissolved so as to maintain the monogamous system and the issues with respect to what protection must be accorded to the party whose marriage is dissolved and his/her children must be answered by the lawmakers upon making the earliest possible review of and revision to Article 988, Subparagraph 2, of the Civil Code by taking into consideration such factors as the principle of reliance protection (Vertrauenschutzprinzip), the nature of the relation of personal status, the satisfaction of matrimonial cohabitation, and the protection of the interests of the children. Before the law is so amended, however, the validity of the second marriage consummated in conformity with the essence of our holding in this Interpretation must be upheld, and the relevant part of the provision of Article 988, Subparagraph 2, of the Civil Code must cease to be operative. A bigamous marriage contracted before the date of this Interpretation will remain valid after the issuance of this Interpretation only if the person to whom the actor was married was found to be in good faith and without fault, although the actor might have acted otherwise. Incidentally, if it so happens that both the first and the second marriages exist simultaneously, the other party to the bigamous marriage may sue for divorce.

　　The purposes of the monogamous system are to maintain the personal and ethical relationship between husband and wife and to realize the principle of equality between men and women, thereby preserving the social order, and the system is thus protected by the Constitution. To this end, the Civil Code makes a bigamous marriage invalid under Article 988, Subparagraph 2. While the freedom of marriage is one of the freedoms safeguarded by the Constitution, it is subject to the restraint put on it by the monogamous system. It has been held by this Yuan Interpretation No. 362 that "the provision of Article 988, Subparagraph 2, of the Civil Code whereby a bigamous marriage is made null and void is intended to maintain the social order based on the monogamous system, and is generally speaking consistent with the Constitution. However, where the prior marriage is dissolved in consequence of an irrevocable judgment and a third person, in good faith and without negligence, contracts a marriage with one of the parties to the prior marriage in reliance of such judgment, which is subsequently reversed, making the subsequent marriage bigamous, the situation is distinguishable from bigamy in its ordinary sense and the validity of the subsequent marriage must be maintained on the principle of reliance protection (Vertrauenschutzprinzip). The aforesaid provision of the Civil Code is inadequate in dealing with such a special circumstance as described above and is thus inconsistent with the intent of the Constitution to protect the freedom of marriage, and must be reviewed for the purpose of revision." The so-called "special circumstance" includes bigamous marriages in consequence of divorce by agreement and other situations where a third person is made to reasonably rely [on the actor's eligibility to marry or remarry]. Insofar as divorce by agreement is concerned, while it is based on the mutual assent of the parties to the marriage, Article 1050 of the Civil Code requires that it be recorded in the household registry. Thus, the third person who relies on such divorce recordation must likewise be protected. Nevertheless, as marriage involves not only change in the relation of personal status of the parties to the marriage, but also such matters concerning public interest as the maintenance of the ethical order of marriage, the health of the family system, and the normal development of the children, the parties to the second marriage must therefore be required to meet more stringent tests in respect of their reliance on the dissolution of the prior marriage rather than mere good faith and lack of negligence on the part of the person with whom he or she contracts the second marriage. In order to retain the validity of the second marriage, both parties thereto must be found to be in good faith and without fault so that the monogamous system will not be jeopardized. Interpretation No. 362 is hereby supplemented. If it results in such a circumstance that both the first and the second marriages exist in force at the same time, the question of which one of the two marriages should be dissolved so as to defend the monogamous system and the issues of what protection must be accorded to the bona fide and faultless party whose marriage is dissolved, i.e., the bona fide and faultless party to the bigamous marriage in case of dissolution of the second marriage or the other party to the first marriage in case of dissolution of the first marriage, and the protection to be accorded to the children born out of the prior and the subsequent marriages in respect of their identity and property must be answered by the lawmakers upon making earliest possible review of and revision to Article 988, Subparagraph 2, of the Civil Code by taking into consideration such factors as the principle of reliance protection (Vertrauenschutzprinzip), the nature of the relation of personal status, the satisfaction of matrimonial cohabitation, and the protection of the interests of the children. Before the law is so amended, however, the validity of the second marriage consummated in conformity with the essence of our holding in this Interpretation must be upheld, and the relevant part of the provision of Article 988, Subparagraph 2, of the Civil Code must cease to be operative. A bigamous marriage contracted before the date of this Interpretation will remain valid after the issuance of this Interpretation only if the person to whom the actor was married was found to be in good faith and without fault, although the actor might have acted otherwise. Incidentally, if it so happens that both the first and the second marriages exist simultaneously, the other party with whom the bigamous marriage is contracted or the party to the first marriage other than the bigamous one may sue for divorce under Article 1052, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 1, or Paragraph 2, of the Civil Code.