{"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_0020.txt","chunk_index":20,"documents_referenced":["朱亞虎傳送予李文宗、張哲陽、蔡壁如之通訊訊息"],"end_seconds":6200,"keywords":["京華城案","回覆訊息","捐款","核心幕僚","沈慶京"],"legal_issues":["李文宗回覆訊息之代表性及其法律責任","核心幕僚是否轉達重要資訊予柯文哲","關於沈慶京捐款210萬元之金流與知情責任"],"legal_issues_raw":["核心幕僚是否轉達重要資訊予柯文哲","關於沈慶京捐款210萬元之金流與知情責任","李文宗回覆訊息之代表性及其法律責任"],"participants":["張哲陽","朱亞虎","李文宗","柯文哲","蔡壁如"],"participants_raw":["李文宗","朱亞虎","張哲陽","蔡壁如","柯文哲"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"0KeURwJSR_Q:chunk_0020","session_date":"2025-12-15","session_id":"0KeURwJSR_Q","session_part":"下午","start_seconds":5900,"summary":"本段逐字稿分析了朱亞虎傳送訊息給三位柯文哲核心幕僚（李文宗、張哲陽、蔡壁如）的不同反應。張哲陽以休假為由迴避，蔡壁如未讀未回，而李文宗則在四天後回覆「市長和我們都心存感激」。分析者認為李文宗扮演市長分身之角色，且該訊息涉及沈慶京捐款210萬元之重大金錢與政治爭議，屬於幕僚應向柯文哲報告的重要資訊，用以推論柯文哲應知情。","video_id":"0KeURwJSR_Q","raw_text_key":"text/0KeURwJSR_Q/raw/chunk_0020.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/0KeURwJSR_Q/cleaned/chunk_0020.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/0KeURwJSR_Q:chunk_0020","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/0KeURwJSR_Q:chunk_0020/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/0KeURwJSR_Q:chunk_0020/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/0KeURwJSR_Q:chunk_0020/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"}}