After the Fair Trade Law of ROC was amended on February 3, 1999., Article 35 is ruled: 「If any enterprise violating the provisions of Article 10, 14, or paragraph 1of Article 20 is ordered by the central competent authority pursuant to Article 41 to cases therefrom, rectify its conduct, or take necessary corrective action within the time prescribed in the order, and after the lapse of such period, shall such enterprise fail to cases therefrom, rectify such conduct, or take any necessary corrective action, or after its ceasing therefrom, shall such enterprise have the same or similar violation again, the actor shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than three years or detention, or by a fine of not more than one hundred million New Taiwan Dollars, or by both.」 this idea is the Principle of 「administrative enforcement before criminal procedure」.Article 35 and 36 of Fair Trade Law were added some words amended……shall such enterprise have the same or similar violation again……, but Article 41 of Fair Trade Law was not added the same words. These words are arguable. What is "the same violation again"? What is "the similar violation again"? How does the central competent authority explain it? These puzzles affect greatly Enterprise. This paper tries to explain it and compare Article 35, 36, 41 of Fair Trade Law with Article 47, 55, 56 of Criminal Code (about recidivism and combined punishment for several offences), and then compare criminal penalty of Article 35, 36 with administrative penalty of Article 41 in Fair Trade Law.