{"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_0000.txt","chunk_index":0,"documents_referenced":["108年5月份都更獎勵辦法","113年9月9日地檢署刑事證本傳票","筆錄","計畫書 (工展書)"],"end_seconds":300,"keywords":["京華城","公展","容積獎勵","準用","答辯","都更獎勵"],"legal_issues":["公展內容是否確實增加公益性與貢獻度","被告是否利用職權對公務員施壓","計畫書中「準用都更獎勵」之法律解釋與實際適用","證人證詞之真實性與可靠性","關於「送原例」之行政程序正當性"],"legal_issues_raw":["關於「送原例」之行政程序正當性","被告是否利用職權對公務員施壓","計畫書中「準用都更獎勵」之法律解釋與實際適用","公展內容是否確實增加公益性與貢獻度","證人證詞之真實性與可靠性"],"participants":["審判長","檢察官","黃景茂"],"participants_raw":["審判長","檢察官","黃景茂 (被告)"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"7SD1Ue5QAiE:chunk_0000","session_date":"2025-12-19","session_id":"7SD1Ue5QAiE","session_part":"下午","start_seconds":0,"summary":"被告黃景茂針對檢察官的論告進行答辯。主要針對「送原例」之目的、其公務員資歷及面對議員壓力之看法、計畫書中「準用都更獎勵」之定義與實際適用範圍、以及公展後增加之公益設施（如公園、道路寬度、路樹等）進行說明，並主張檢察官誤認林洲民與林欽榮之證詞而導致起訴錯誤。","video_id":"7SD1Ue5QAiE","raw_text_key":"text/7SD1Ue5QAiE/raw/chunk_0000.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/7SD1Ue5QAiE/cleaned/chunk_0000.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/7SD1Ue5QAiE:chunk_0000","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/7SD1Ue5QAiE:chunk_0000/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/7SD1Ue5QAiE:chunk_0000/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/7SD1Ue5QAiE:chunk_0000/cleaned","session":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/sessions/7SD1Ue5QAiE","case":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/cases/113年度金訴字第51號"}}