{"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_0010.txt","chunk_index":10,"documents_referenced":["109年5月22日都委會第765次會議後之對話紀錄","110年6月17日都委會第775次會議相關對話紀錄","110年7月6日公務員對話紀錄","111年11月2日公務員對話紀錄","113年1月8日公務員對話紀錄","偵訊筆錄","審判筆錄","監察院113年1月16日之糾正文"],"end_seconds":3250,"keywords":["京華城案","公務員施壓","對話紀錄","技術性拖延","違法性","都委會"],"legal_issues":["公務員之主觀意圖與違法性認定","公務員在行政處分過程是否受到非法施壓","證人於審判中之證詞是否受壓力影響而失真"],"legal_issues_raw":["公務員在行政處分過程是否受到非法施壓","公務員之主觀意圖與違法性認定","證人於審判中之證詞是否受壓力影響而失真"],"participants":["張公務員","檢察官","洪公務員","辯護人","黃公務員"],"participants_raw":["檢察官","辯護人","張公務員","黃公務員","洪公務員"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0010","session_date":"2025-12-24","session_id":"HXqeVOdrDrs","session_part":"下午","start_seconds":2950,"summary":"檢察官針對京華城案中公務員的處境進行論述，反駁辯方主張的「公務員勇於任事」說法。檢方提出多筆案發當時的對話紀錄，證明基層公務員在處理案件時感受到來自高層（如彭富）、議員及財團的壓力，甚至有意採取「技術性拖延」直到市長換屆，顯示公務員當時對案件違法性有疑慮且處於被動施壓狀態，而非主動積極執行。","video_id":"HXqeVOdrDrs","raw_text_key":"text/HXqeVOdrDrs/raw/chunk_0010.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/HXqeVOdrDrs/cleaned/chunk_0010.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0010","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0010/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0010/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0010/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"}}