{"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_0008.txt","chunk_index":8,"documents_referenced":["偵訊筆錄","最高法院108年台上638號判決"],"end_seconds":2660,"keywords":["京華城","偽證","直接感官基礎","羈押","補強證據","證人可信度"],"legal_issues":["偽證罪之可能性","證人之動機與誘因 (自首減刑、爭取交保)","證人陳述之可信度與證據能力","間接證據與推論之合理性 (關於2月20日會面內容之認定)"],"legal_issues_raw":["證人陳述之可信度與證據能力","間接證據與推論之合理性 (關於2月20日會面內容之認定)","偽證罪之可能性","證人之動機與誘因 (自首減刑、爭取交保)"],"participants":["朱亞虎","檢察官","沈慶京","辯護律師","陳欣欣"],"participants_raw":["辯護律師","朱亞虎 (證人/被告)","檢察官","陳欣欣","沈慶京"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"Q2uHOiwtENo:chunk_0008","session_date":"2025-12-18","session_id":"Q2uHOiwtENo","session_part":"下午","start_seconds":2360,"summary":"辯護律師針對證人朱亞虎之證詞可靠性提出質疑。律師主張朱亞虎對於2月20日會面內容的陳述缺乏直接感官基礎（不在場），且其引用的最高法院判決與本案事實不符。此外，律師指出朱亞虎曾就「高明虎捐款」一事編造事實，涉嫌偽證，且其在羈押後才改變說法，具有爭取交保或減刑之誘因，因此其證詞缺乏可信度，且檢方提出的時序推論不足以作為補強證據。","video_id":"Q2uHOiwtENo","raw_text_key":"text/Q2uHOiwtENo/raw/chunk_0008.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/Q2uHOiwtENo/cleaned/chunk_0008.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/Q2uHOiwtENo:chunk_0008","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/Q2uHOiwtENo:chunk_0008/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/Q2uHOiwtENo:chunk_0008/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/Q2uHOiwtENo:chunk_0008/cleaned","session":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/sessions/Q2uHOiwtENo","case":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/cases/113年度金訴字第51號"}}