{"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_0025.txt","chunk_index":25,"documents_referenced":["臺北市政府處理人民陳情案件注意事項","行政程序法","起訴書"],"end_seconds":7675,"keywords":["判斷餘地","圖利罪","對外發生法律效果","行政規則","迎合上意","黃景茂"],"legal_issues":["公務員之判斷餘地與合理性認定","圖利動機之認定（金流與利益關係）","圖利罪之構成要件（明知違背對外發生法律效果之規定）","行政規則是否能作為圖利罪之適用法令"],"legal_issues_raw":["圖利罪之構成要件（明知違背對外發生法律效果之規定）","行政規則是否能作為圖利罪之適用法令","公務員之判斷餘地與合理性認定","圖利動機之認定（金流與利益關係）"],"participants":["辯護律師"],"participants_raw":["辯護律師"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"7SD1Ue5QAiE:chunk_0025","session_date":"2025-12-19","session_id":"7SD1Ue5QAiE","session_part":"下午","start_seconds":7375,"summary":"辯方針對被告黃景茂是否涉圖利罪進行辯護。首先主張應給予合議制機關「判斷餘地」，避免將合理性問題視為合法性問題。其次，論證被告與微金集團無私交、無金流往來，且其職涯背景與資歷使其無需透過「迎合上意」來求官。最後，針對圖利罪之構成要件，辯稱檢方指稱之違反法令（臺北市政府處理人民陳情案件注意事項）僅為「行政規則」，依據《行政程序法》不屬於圖利罪中「對外發生法律效果」之法令，故不構成犯罪。","video_id":"7SD1Ue5QAiE","raw_text_key":"text/7SD1Ue5QAiE/raw/chunk_0025.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/7SD1Ue5QAiE/cleaned/chunk_0025.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/7SD1Ue5QAiE:chunk_0025","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/7SD1Ue5QAiE:chunk_0025/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/7SD1Ue5QAiE:chunk_0025/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/7SD1Ue5QAiE:chunk_0025/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"}}