{"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_0026.txt","chunk_index":26,"documents_referenced":["政治獻金法"],"end_seconds":7970,"keywords":["人力派遣","政治獻金","業務費","構成要件","眾望基金會","背信"],"legal_issues":["政治獻金之定義及其法律構成要件之認定","業務費與人事費之區分是否構成背信罪之主觀意圖"],"legal_issues_raw":["業務費與人事費之區分是否構成背信罪之主觀意圖","政治獻金之定義及其法律構成要件之認定"],"participants":["徐世偉(律師)","李文娟","法官","辯護人"],"participants_raw":["辯護人","法官","李文娟 (被告)","徐世偉 (律師)"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"JaMUi1QUmbg:chunk_0026","session_date":"2025-12-22","session_id":"JaMUi1QUmbg","session_part":"下午","start_seconds":7670,"summary":"本段逐字稿包含兩部分內容：首先是辯護人針對李文宗之指控進行辯護，主張將人事費用列為「業務費」支出（如人力派遣、委辦費）在實務上常見，且其目的仍為推動社會政策研究，不應因此認定具有主觀背信意圖；隨後法庭進入答辯階段，辯護人徐世偉律師針對販售 KP 小物之爭議，提出應嚴格依據《政治獻金法》之構成要件來定義政治獻金，而非採取概括性的認定。","video_id":"JaMUi1QUmbg","raw_text_key":"text/JaMUi1QUmbg/raw/chunk_0026.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/JaMUi1QUmbg/cleaned/chunk_0026.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/JaMUi1QUmbg:chunk_0026","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/JaMUi1QUmbg:chunk_0026/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/JaMUi1QUmbg:chunk_0026/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/JaMUi1QUmbg:chunk_0026/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"}}