{"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_0011.txt","chunk_index":11,"documents_referenced":["刑事訴訟法鑑識規範第五十四點","政府機關資安事件數位證據保全辦法"],"end_seconds":3545,"keywords":["A137行動硬碟","一致性","完整性","小省1500","數位證據","證據監管鏈","證據能力"],"legal_issues":["數位證據之完整性與一致性之認定","數位證據之識別、收集、擷取、封緘與運送之合法性","證據監管鏈（Chain of Custody）缺失對證據能力之影響"],"legal_issues_raw":["數位證據之完整性與一致性之認定","證據監管鏈（Chain of Custody）缺失對證據能力之影響","數位證據之識別、收集、擷取、封緘與運送之合法性"],"participants":["辯護人"],"participants_raw":["辯護人"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"NDpqyQ8TlV0:chunk_0011","session_date":"2025-12-17","session_id":"NDpqyQ8TlV0","session_part":"上午","start_seconds":3245,"summary":"辯護人針對 A137 行動硬碟在扣押（113年8月30日）至鑑識（113年9月11日）期間，未維持證據監管鏈（Chain of Custody）之完整性提出質疑。辯方透過類比「皮箱與毒品」之情境，主張若缺乏完整監管紀錄，無法排除證據（如「小省 1500」資料）被後續植入或篡改的可能性，因此該數位證據應不具證據能力。","video_id":"NDpqyQ8TlV0","raw_text_key":"text/NDpqyQ8TlV0/raw/chunk_0011.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/NDpqyQ8TlV0/cleaned/chunk_0011.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NDpqyQ8TlV0:chunk_0011","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NDpqyQ8TlV0:chunk_0011/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NDpqyQ8TlV0:chunk_0011/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NDpqyQ8TlV0:chunk_0011/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"}}