{"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_0009.txt","chunk_index":9,"documents_referenced":["柯文哲與黃珊珊之簡訊","檢方提交之金流證明資料","沈慶京 111 年現金提領紀錄","羈押書"],"end_seconds":2955,"keywords":["拼湊證據","現金提領","行賄","證據能力","金流分析"],"legal_issues":["傳聞法則及其例外之適用","羈押理由之正當性","行賄罪之金流證明","證據之完整性與拼湊證據之爭議"],"legal_issues_raw":["行賄罪之金流證明","證據之完整性與拼湊證據之爭議","傳聞法則及其例外之適用","羈押理由之正當性"],"participants":["吳採仙","柯文哲","檢察官","沈慶京","辯方律師","黃珊珊"],"participants_raw":["辯方律師","柯文哲","沈慶京","吳採仙","黃珊珊","檢察官"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"NDpqyQ8TlV0:chunk_0009","session_date":"2025-12-17","session_id":"NDpqyQ8TlV0","session_part":"上午","start_seconds":2655,"summary":"辯方針對檢方指控沈慶京行賄柯文哲 1500 萬之主張進行反駁。辯方主張沈慶京 111 年度的現金提領紀錄顯示其每月平均提領約 1000 萬，屬於正常行為，並非不尋常之行賄金流；且沈慶京於 12 月回存 1000 萬之事實與行賄邏輯相悖。此外，辯方認為關於柯文哲與黃珊珊之簡訊僅為柯之主觀以為，並非事實，指控檢方拼湊證據、隱匿全貌，缺乏明確的行賄時間、地點及金流證明。","video_id":"NDpqyQ8TlV0","raw_text_key":"text/NDpqyQ8TlV0/raw/chunk_0009.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/NDpqyQ8TlV0/cleaned/chunk_0009.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NDpqyQ8TlV0:chunk_0009","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NDpqyQ8TlV0:chunk_0009/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NDpqyQ8TlV0:chunk_0009/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NDpqyQ8TlV0:chunk_0009/cleaned","session":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/sessions/NDpqyQ8TlV0","case":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/cases/113年度金訴字第51號"}}