{"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_0014.txt","chunk_index":14,"documents_referenced":["最高法院106年台上字第2370號判決","證人保護法第14條第1項","貪汙治罪條例第8條第2項","都市計畫法第24條","釋字第415號解釋"],"end_seconds":4430,"keywords":["任意性","共同被告","因果關係","法定寬典","自白","證據能力","都市計畫變更"],"legal_issues":["偵查階段自白之任意性與證據能力","公務員於都市計畫變更申請中之審查義務與結果之因果關係","共同被告對於他人自白之爭執權限（釋字第415號解釋之適用）","法定寬典（貪汙治罪條例、證人保護法）對被告認罪之影響"],"legal_issues_raw":["公務員於都市計畫變更申請中之審查義務與結果之因果關係","偵查階段自白之任意性與證據能力","法定寬典（貪汙治罪條例、證人保護法）對被告認罪之影響","共同被告對於他人自白之爭執權限（釋字第415號解釋之適用）"],"participants":["其他被告","檢察官","邵琇珮","黃景茂"],"participants_raw":["檢察官（或代表檢方之陳述者）","黃景茂（都發局長，被告）","邵琇珮（被告）","其他被告"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"NfrdKX5NBQc:chunk_0014","session_date":"2025-12-19","session_id":"NfrdKX5NBQc","session_part":"上午","start_seconds":4130,"summary":"本段紀錄主要分為兩部分：首先討論黃景茂（都發局長）在都市計畫變更申請案中，其審查義務與最終結果之間的因果關係，反駁其卸任後才有進展之辯稱；其次討論被告邵琇珮在偵查階段之自白及其證詞的證據能力，分析其認罪過程之合法性（包含律師陪同、法定減刑告知），並引用最高法院判決及釋字第415號解釋，說明共同被告對於他人自白之爭執權限。","video_id":"NfrdKX5NBQc","raw_text_key":"text/NfrdKX5NBQc/raw/chunk_0014.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/NfrdKX5NBQc/cleaned/chunk_0014.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NfrdKX5NBQc:chunk_0014","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NfrdKX5NBQc:chunk_0014/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NfrdKX5NBQc:chunk_0014/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/NfrdKX5NBQc:chunk_0014/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"}}