{"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_0004.txt","chunk_index":4,"documents_referenced":["103年判決","110年大法庭裁定","貪汙治罪條例第五條第一項第三款"],"end_seconds":1480,"keywords":["不違背職務收賄罪","互斥構成要件","實質影響公務外觀理論","民意代表","職務上行為","違背職務收賄罪"],"legal_issues":["110年大法庭裁定關於「實質影響公務外觀理論」之適用","「職務上行為」與「違背職務」之法律定義及其互斥關係","民意代表於議場外之施壓、關說、請託是否屬於貪汙治罪條例第五條第一項第三款之「職務上行為」","違背職務收賄罪與不違背職務收賄罪之構成要件區分"],"legal_issues_raw":["「職務上行為」與「違背職務」之法律定義及其互斥關係","民意代表於議場外之施壓、關說、請託是否屬於貪汙治罪條例第五條第一項第三款之「職務上行為」","違背職務收賄罪與不違背職務收賄罪之構成要件區分","110年大法庭裁定關於「實質影響公務外觀理論」之適用"],"participants":["尹小威","檢察官","辯護人"],"participants_raw":["辯護人","尹小威 (被告)","檢察官"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0004","session_date":"2025-12-24","session_id":"HXqeVOdrDrs","session_part":"下午","start_seconds":1180,"summary":"辯護人針對被告尹小威是否構成「違背職務收賄罪」進行法律論述。辯方主張「職務上行為」與「違背職務」在邏輯上互斥，且根據110年大法庭裁定之「實質影響公務外觀理論」，被告之行為至多僅可能構成「不違背職務收賄罪」，而非檢方指控之「違背職務收賄罪」。辯方強調法律評價應基於構成要件之邏輯分析，而非道德或情緒判斷，並指出檢方援引大法庭裁定擴張解釋「職務上行為」時，應同步接受其邏輯限制。","video_id":"HXqeVOdrDrs","raw_text_key":"text/HXqeVOdrDrs/raw/chunk_0004.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/HXqeVOdrDrs/cleaned/chunk_0004.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0004","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0004/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0004/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0004/cleaned","session":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/sessions/HXqeVOdrDrs","case":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/cases/113年度金訴字第51號"}}