{"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_0025.txt","chunk_index":25,"documents_referenced":["胡芳瓊偵訊筆錄","補充狀書 12","陳俊源 LINE 訊息","陳俊源法庭證詞"],"end_seconds":7675,"keywords":["11樓溝通方案","京華城","和解","樓地板面積","演義","行政訴訟"],"legal_issues":["檢方指控之會面事實是否存在矛盾（關於 109/2/18 與 109/2/20 之溝通方案）","行政程序中「演義」之性質是否構成對特定對象之特別待遇","行政訴訟期間與行政機關協商和解之合法性"],"legal_issues_raw":["檢方指控之會面事實是否存在矛盾（關於 109/2/18 與 109/2/20 之溝通方案）","行政程序中「演義」之性質是否構成對特定對象之特別待遇","行政訴訟期間與行政機關協商和解之合法性"],"participants":["吳順民","彭振聲","應曉薇","林律師","沈慶京","潘律師","胡芳瓊","蘇中松","辯方律師","陳俊源","黃景茂"],"participants_raw":["辯方律師","應曉薇","吳順民","沈慶京","彭振聲","黃景茂","胡芳瓊","陳俊源","潘律師","林律師","蘇中松"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"Q2uHOiwtENo:chunk_0025","session_date":"2025-12-18","session_id":"Q2uHOiwtENo","session_part":"下午","start_seconds":7375,"summary":"辯方律師針對檢方指控之 109 年 2 月 18 日會面情節提出質疑，認為檢方所述之「雙方代表達成重大共識」與證人吳順民之陳述矛盾。律師主張該次會面僅為單純陳情，當時並無具體方案可供「放水」，且針對市府採取之「演義」方式，認為是常態行政處理而非京華城之特別待遇。此外，針對行政訴訟期間之協商，律師主張法院與律師團均不反對，屬於合法且合理的和解嘗試。","video_id":"Q2uHOiwtENo","raw_text_key":"text/Q2uHOiwtENo/raw/chunk_0025.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/Q2uHOiwtENo/cleaned/chunk_0025.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/Q2uHOiwtENo:chunk_0025","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/Q2uHOiwtENo:chunk_0025/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/Q2uHOiwtENo:chunk_0025/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/Q2uHOiwtENo:chunk_0025/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"}}