{"case_id":"113年度金訴字第51號","case_number":"113年度金訴字第51號","chunk_filename":"chunk_0010.txt","chunk_index":10,"documents_referenced":["最高法院相關判決","陳俊源與朱亞虎之對話紀錄","黃景茂之行事曆"],"end_seconds":3250,"keywords":["不公開會議","城會","京華城案","證人適格性","證據比對"],"legal_issues":["證人證詞之證據能力（區分單純臆測與基於合理體驗之事實）","關於京華城案不公開城會之事實認定"],"legal_issues_raw":["證人證詞之證據能力（區分單純臆測與基於合理體驗之事實）","關於京華城案不公開城會之事實認定"],"participants":["朱亞虎","柯文哲","沈慶京","陳俊源","黃景茂"],"participants_raw":["朱亞虎","沈慶京","柯文哲","陳俊源","黃景茂"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"0KeURwJSR_Q:chunk_0010","session_date":"2025-12-15","session_id":"0KeURwJSR_Q","session_part":"下午","start_seconds":2950,"summary":"本段內容主要討論證人朱亞虎證詞的可信度及其與京華城案之關聯。法院/檢方主張朱亞虎基於事前、事中、事後的實際參與經驗，其證詞具有客觀基礎而非單純臆測。同時，透過黃景茂的行事曆及陳俊源與朱亞虎的對話紀錄，佐證2月20日柯文哲與沈慶京會面後，隨即於2月21日召開不公開的京華城專案城會，用以反駁柯文哲否認開會的說法。","video_id":"0KeURwJSR_Q","raw_text_key":"text/0KeURwJSR_Q/raw/chunk_0010.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/0KeURwJSR_Q/cleaned/chunk_0010.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/0KeURwJSR_Q:chunk_0010","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/0KeURwJSR_Q:chunk_0010/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/0KeURwJSR_Q:chunk_0010/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/0KeURwJSR_Q:chunk_0010/cleaned","session":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/sessions/0KeURwJSR_Q","case":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/cases/113年度金訴字第51號"}}