{"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_0003.txt","chunk_index":3,"documents_referenced":["協議書（關於保證金退還條款）","都委會審議資料","都發局鑑價資料（日期：110年11月19日）"],"end_seconds":1185,"keywords":["京華城案","保證金","圖利罪","容積獎勵","對價性","平等原則","都市計畫"],"legal_issues":["公務員之專業審查責任","對價性評估（容積獎勵收益與回饋專案價值之落差）","行政處分之平等原則（單一所有權人獲取特權之爭議）","財物濫用之圖利罪（是否因違反平等原則、濫用行政處分而構成）"],"legal_issues_raw":["財物濫用之圖利罪（是否因違反平等原則、濫用行政處分而構成）","行政處分之平等原則（單一所有權人獲取特權之爭議）","對價性評估（容積獎勵收益與回饋專案價值之落差）","公務員之專業審查責任"],"participants":["彭振聲","控方（發言者）","法官","辯方","邵琇珮","黃景茂"],"participants_raw":["控方（發言者）","辯方","法官","彭振聲","黃景茂（前工務局長）","邵琇珮（前工務局總工程師）"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"NfrdKX5NBQc:chunk_0003","session_date":"2025-12-19","session_id":"NfrdKX5NBQc","session_part":"上午","start_seconds":885,"summary":"本段文字聚焦於京華城案中，關於公務員是否構成「財物濫用之圖利罪」的法律爭議。控方主張該案針對單一所有權人量身打造容積獎勵，違反平等原則且缺乏對價性，導致市府損失（估計差額約20億至90億元），且相關估價資料未提交都委會審議。辯方則主張該計畫導致開發商虧本，並認為保證金應計入回饋價值，但控方反駁保證金最終會無息退還，不屬於市民回饋。","video_id":"NfrdKX5NBQc","raw_text_key":"text/NfrdKX5NBQc/raw/chunk_0003.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/NfrdKX5NBQc/cleaned/chunk_0003.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NfrdKX5NBQc:chunk_0003","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NfrdKX5NBQc:chunk_0003/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NfrdKX5NBQc:chunk_0003/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NfrdKX5NBQc:chunk_0003/cleaned","session":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/sessions/NfrdKX5NBQc","case":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/cases/113年度金訴字第51號"}}