{"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_0007.txt","chunk_index":7,"documents_referenced":["勞工保險局函示","木可公司往來明細","木可公司網頁資料","木可公司與柯文哲之簽約合約","起訴書"],"end_seconds":2365,"keywords":["勞保退保","捐款兌換","授權費","政治獻金法","木可公司","柯文哲","進辦"],"legal_issues":["《政治獻金法》第23條第4款之適用（關於剩餘款項使用於參加公職人員選舉之認定）","公益侵佔與勞保投保之合法性","捐款與兌換小物的認定（反駁檢察官關於單筆捐款無兌換之說法）","授權費之合法性（依據營業額20%之約定計算）","資金流向之關聯性（爭議木可公司收受進辦款項與支付柯文哲授權費之間是否存在因果關係）"],"legal_issues_raw":["捐款與兌換小物的認定（反駁檢察官關於單筆捐款無兌換之說法）","資金流向之關聯性（爭議木可公司收受進辦款項與支付柯文哲授權費之間是否存在因果關係）","授權費之合法性（依據營業額20%之約定計算）","《政治獻金法》第23條第4款之適用（關於剩餘款項使用於參加公職人員選舉之認定）","公益侵佔與勞保投保之合法性"],"participants":["辯方律師/代理人"],"participants_raw":["辯方律師/代理人"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"JaMUi1QUmbg:chunk_0007","session_date":"2025-12-22","session_id":"JaMUi1QUmbg","session_part":"下午","start_seconds":2065,"summary":"辯方針對檢方指控之捐款兌換小物、木可公司授權費流向以及公益侵佔（代收代付薪資）等議題進行反駁。重點在於證明捐款可兌換小物、木可公司支付給柯文哲的450萬授權費符合合約比例且與進辦1,500萬款項無直接關聯，並質疑檢方對《政治獻金法》適用之主張，以及說明勞保退保之行政流程。","video_id":"JaMUi1QUmbg","raw_text_key":"text/JaMUi1QUmbg/raw/chunk_0007.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/JaMUi1QUmbg/cleaned/chunk_0007.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/JaMUi1QUmbg:chunk_0007","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/JaMUi1QUmbg:chunk_0007/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/JaMUi1QUmbg:chunk_0007/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/JaMUi1QUmbg:chunk_0007/cleaned","session":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/sessions/JaMUi1QUmbg","case":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/cases/113年度金訴字第51號"}}