{"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_0024.txt","chunk_index":24,"documents_referenced":["783會議決議內容","刑法（濫權起訴罪、濫權不起訴罪）","卡夫卡《審判》（文學引用）","都更條例"],"end_seconds":7380,"keywords":["公務員","勇於決明","因人設事","圖利罪","對價性","辯護答辯"],"legal_issues":["公務員執行職務之對價性分析","圖利罪之認定標準","圖利罪修正目的（促進公務員勇於決明）","起訴標準之公平性（是否因人設事）"],"legal_issues_raw":["圖利罪之認定標準","公務員執行職務之對價性分析","起訴標準之公平性（是否因人設事）","圖利罪修正目的（促進公務員勇於決明）"],"participants":["吳子森律師","宋言議","彭振聲","林洲民","法官（合議庭）","黃景茂"],"participants_raw":["法官（合議庭）","吳子森律師（被告黃景茂之辯護人）","被告黃景茂（提及）","彭振聲（證人/提及）","林洲民（提及）","宋言議（提及）"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"7SD1Ue5QAiE:chunk_0024","session_date":"2025-12-19","session_id":"7SD1Ue5QAiE","session_part":"下午","start_seconds":7080,"summary":"本段逐字稿為法庭辯論紀錄。辯護律師針對被告黃景茂被指控之圖利罪進行答辯，質疑起訴標準是否存在「因人設事」之不公，並引用卡夫卡《審判》比喻被告處境。律師將辯護重點分為六大項，核心聚焦於「簽請研議」與「送公展」之程序，從法源依據、許可權劃分及對價性分析，主張圖利罪之認定應考量公務員勇於決明的行政需求，而非導致公務員因恐懼而「躺平」。","video_id":"7SD1Ue5QAiE","raw_text_key":"text/7SD1Ue5QAiE/raw/chunk_0024.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/7SD1Ue5QAiE/cleaned/chunk_0024.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/7SD1Ue5QAiE:chunk_0024","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/7SD1Ue5QAiE:chunk_0024/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/7SD1Ue5QAiE:chunk_0024/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/7SD1Ue5QAiE:chunk_0024/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"}}