{"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_0014.txt","chunk_index":14,"documents_referenced":["最高法院 99 年臺上字 5421 號判決","花蓮高等法院相關判決","都市計畫法第 45 條"],"end_seconds":4430,"keywords":["不為而為","對價關係","收賄罪","裁量權","違背職務","都市更新","都市計畫法"],"legal_issues":["「違背職務」與「明知違背法令」之法律關係（包含關係）","公務員行使裁量權是否違反適合性、必要性、比例原則及平等原則而構成「違背職務」","違背職務行收賄罪之構成要件（對價關係與職務行為）","都市更新之「功能性低落」定義是否等同於營運狀況不佳"],"legal_issues_raw":["都市更新之「功能性低落」定義是否等同於營運狀況不佳","公務員行使裁量權是否違反適合性、必要性、比例原則及平等原則而構成「違背職務」","「違背職務」與「明知違背法令」之法律關係（包含關係）","違背職務行收賄罪之構成要件（對價關係與職務行為）"],"participants":["柯文哲","檢察官","發言者（分析法律邏輯之人）","辯護人"],"participants_raw":["發言者（分析法律邏輯之人）","柯文哲（被提及之被告）","檢察官（被提及之起訴方）","辯護人（被提及之對立方）"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0014","session_date":"2025-12-24","session_id":"HXqeVOdrDrs","session_part":"下午","start_seconds":4130,"summary":"本段文字主要討論關於都更計畫之合法性、公務員行使裁量權是否構成「違背職務」之法律定義，並引用最高法院判例（關於花蓮都計變更案）說明即便在裁量權範圍內，若違反比例原則或法律規定（如都計法第45條）仍可構成違背職務。最後將此邏輯對比至本案，指出檢察官認為柯文哲市長在加速流程、指定人員等行為中存在違背職務之嫌。","video_id":"HXqeVOdrDrs","raw_text_key":"text/HXqeVOdrDrs/raw/chunk_0014.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/HXqeVOdrDrs/cleaned/chunk_0014.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0014","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0014/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0014/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0014/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"}}