{"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_0011.txt","chunk_index":11,"documents_referenced":["110年8月13日都市設計審議委員會便箋","113年10月11日都發局容積獎勵試價試算說明","最高行政法院108年上訴字第666號判決"],"end_seconds":3545,"keywords":["京華城","利益衡量","宜居城市貢獻獎勵","容積獎勵","對價性","都委會"],"legal_issues":["容積獎勵之對價性（對價關係是否均衡）","行政行為之利益衡量原則（是否符合比例原則）","都市計畫變更是否涉及不法獲利或違法容積獎勵"],"legal_issues_raw":["容積獎勵之對價性（對價關係是否均衡）","行政行為之利益衡量原則（是否符合比例原則）","都市計畫變更是否涉及不法獲利或違法容積獎勵"],"participants":["嚴巴瑞","張嘉文","張家祺","林","柯文哲","檢察官","黃景茂（辯護人）"],"participants_raw":["檢察官","林副柯文哲","黃景茂（辯護人）","柯柯文哲","張嘉文","嚴巴瑞","張家祺"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"CXKiBIamLC4:chunk_0011","session_date":"2025-12-15","session_id":"CXKiBIamLC4","session_part":"上午","start_seconds":3245,"summary":"本段文字主要討論京華城案中關於「不法容積獎勵」的爭議。內容涵蓋三個重點：首先是針對林副市長是否被「打臉」的辯論，指出陳情訴求（解除使用限制）與都更案訴求（回復1.0、2.84）不同；其次，引用最高行政法院判決說明容積獎勵應符合「對價性」與「利益衡量原則」；最後分析京華城獲取的容積獎勵價值（約121億元）與其回饋專案價值之間存在巨大差距，且相關對價性分析資料未進入都委會審議過程。","video_id":"CXKiBIamLC4","raw_text_key":"text/CXKiBIamLC4/raw/chunk_0011.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/CXKiBIamLC4/cleaned/chunk_0011.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/CXKiBIamLC4:chunk_0011","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/CXKiBIamLC4:chunk_0011/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/CXKiBIamLC4:chunk_0011/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/CXKiBIamLC4:chunk_0011/cleaned","session":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/sessions/CXKiBIamLC4","case":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/cases/113年度金訴字第51號"}}