{"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":["110年7月1日第二次專案小組會議紀錄","劉秀玲傳給彭振聲之說明","張立立之筆錄","胡芳熊之受訊筆錄","都委會審議紀錄/調研小組紀錄"],"end_seconds":7970,"keywords":["京華城","容積獎勵","筆錄曲解","都委會","都市計畫","都更條例"],"legal_issues":["京華城案之容積獎勵是否違法適用都更條例（法律適用之爭議：準用 vs 適用）","筆錄記載是否真實反映證人陳述（程序正義）","都市計畫案件是否可參照都更條例取得容積獎勵"],"legal_issues_raw":["筆錄記載是否真實反映證人陳述（程序正義）","京華城案之容積獎勵是否違法適用都更條例（法律適用之爭議：準用 vs 適用）","都市計畫案件是否可參照都更條例取得容積獎勵"],"participants":["劉秀玲","張立立","彭振聲","法官（文中稱為假官）","白仁德","胡芳熊","辯方律師"],"participants_raw":["辯方律師","張立立（證人/提及者）","劉秀玲（提及者）","彭振聲（提及者）","白仁德（提及者）","胡芳熊（證人/提及者）","法官（文中稱為假官）"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"NDpqyQ8TlV0:chunk_0026","session_date":"2025-12-17","session_id":"NDpqyQ8TlV0","session_part":"上午","start_seconds":7670,"summary":"辯方律師質疑法官（文中稱「假官」）在製作筆錄時刻意曲解證人（如張立立）的陳述，僅記錄結論而忽略前提過程，指控其不願釐清事實且預設結論。同時，律師引用劉秀玲與彭振聲的對話及白仁德的意見，主張京華城案在法律適用（準用而非適用都更條例）及都委會審議程序上並無違法，並針對證人胡芳熊關於都市計畫案件是否能參照都更條例取得容積獎勵的證詞進行分析。","video_id":"NDpqyQ8TlV0","raw_text_key":"text/NDpqyQ8TlV0/raw/chunk_0026.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/NDpqyQ8TlV0/cleaned/chunk_0026.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NDpqyQ8TlV0:chunk_0026","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NDpqyQ8TlV0:chunk_0026/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NDpqyQ8TlV0:chunk_0026/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NDpqyQ8TlV0:chunk_0026/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"}}