{"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_0020.txt","chunk_index":20,"documents_referenced":["中華民國憲法第 23 條","土管條例（都市計畫法相關條例）","臺北市都市計畫施行自治條例第 25 條"],"end_seconds":6200,"keywords":["制度性授權","南港專案","受益處分","容積獎勵","法律保留原則","都市計畫"],"legal_issues":["容積獎勵是否屬於限制人民基本權之處分或屬於受益處分","法律保留原則（Legal Reservation Principle）之適用範圍","都市計畫法及臺北市都市計畫施行自治條例之授權合法性"],"legal_issues_raw":["法律保留原則（Legal Reservation Principle）之適用範圍","容積獎勵是否屬於限制人民基本權之處分或屬於受益處分","都市計畫法及臺北市都市計畫施行自治條例之授權合法性"],"participants":["庭長","未具名發言者（對檢方表達不滿者）","柯文哲","鄭律師（柯文哲辯護人）"],"participants_raw":["未具名發言者（對檢方表達不滿者）","庭長","鄭律師（柯文哲辯護人）","柯文哲（被告）"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0020","session_date":"2025-12-24","session_id":"HXqeVOdrDrs","session_part":"下午","start_seconds":5900,"summary":"本段紀錄包含兩部分：首先是一名發言者（疑似被告或相關人士）情緒激動地指責檢方為了打擊柯文哲而造成冤獄，並為公務員黃景耀及邵秀萍辯護，認為南港專案並非弊案；隨後進入正式辯護程序，柯文哲的辯護律師針對檢方主張的「法律保留原則」進行法律反駁，主張容積獎勵屬於「受益處分」，不應適用限制基本權的嚴格法律保留原則，且已有都市計畫法及自治條例之制度性授權。","video_id":"HXqeVOdrDrs","raw_text_key":"text/HXqeVOdrDrs/raw/chunk_0020.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/HXqeVOdrDrs/cleaned/chunk_0020.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0020","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0020/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0020/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/HXqeVOdrDrs:chunk_0020/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"}}