{"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_0024.txt","chunk_index":24,"documents_referenced":["偵查筆錄","新聞報導","會議紀錄","起訴書（第42頁、第90頁）"],"end_seconds":7380,"keywords":["行政指導","西部計畫","證人可信度","起訴書矛盾","違法行政"],"legal_issues":["行政行為之合法性認定（關於「西部計畫」是否為違法行政）","證人證詞之可信度（是否受新聞影響或與其他筆錄矛盾）","起訴書事實記載之矛盾與不一致（關於109年2月18日會面之版本差異）"],"legal_issues_raw":["證人證詞之可信度（是否受新聞影響或與其他筆錄矛盾）","起訴書事實記載之矛盾與不一致（關於109年2月18日會面之版本差異）","行政行為之合法性認定（關於「西部計畫」是否為違法行政）"],"participants":["應曉薇","吳順民","延邦瑞","彭振聲","柯文哲","沈慶京","辯方律師（發言者）","邵琇珮","黃景茂"],"participants_raw":["辯方律師（發言者）","邵琇珮（證人）","吳順民（被告/當事人）","應曉薇","延邦瑞","沈慶京","柯文哲","彭振聲","黃景茂"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"Q2uHOiwtENo:chunk_0024","session_date":"2025-12-18","session_id":"Q2uHOiwtENo","session_part":"下午","start_seconds":7080,"summary":"辯方針對證人邵琇珮的證詞可靠性提出質疑，指出其陳述與延邦瑞之筆錄不符，且可能受新聞報導影響而產生偏見。同時，辯方指出起訴書中關於109年2月18日會面情節的記載存在嚴重矛盾，同一日期在不同頁碼的版本中，會面人數、對象及過程描述不一。","video_id":"Q2uHOiwtENo","raw_text_key":"text/Q2uHOiwtENo/raw/chunk_0024.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/Q2uHOiwtENo/cleaned/chunk_0024.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/Q2uHOiwtENo:chunk_0024","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/Q2uHOiwtENo:chunk_0024/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/Q2uHOiwtENo:chunk_0024/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/Q2uHOiwtENo:chunk_0024/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"}}