{"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_0012.txt","chunk_index":12,"documents_referenced":["臺北看守所回函"],"end_seconds":3840,"keywords":["京華城案","介護病房","械具使用","比例原則","行賄","非人道待遇"],"legal_issues":["檢察官偵查程序之適法性與人道考量","羈押期間之人權保障與械具使用之比例原則","行賄罪之構成要件（是否具備行賄動機與對象）"],"legal_issues_raw":["行賄罪之構成要件（是否具備行賄動機與對象）","羈押期間之人權保障與械具使用之比例原則","檢察官偵查程序之適法性與人道考量"],"participants":["受命","吳順民","林俊言","沈慶京","臺北看守所人員","辯護律師"],"participants_raw":["辯護律師","沈慶京 (被告)","吳順民 (威京集團顧問)","林俊言 (檢察官)","臺北看守所人員","受命法官"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"X9M3axM1LIU:chunk_0012","session_date":"2025-12-18","session_id":"X9M3axM1LIU","session_part":"上午","start_seconds":3540,"summary":"辯方律師針對沈慶京案提出兩大論點：首先，否認向吳順民行賄，主張吳為威京集團顧問，無行賄必要，且京華城陳情過程與吳順民之溝通行為與沈慶京無關；其次，強烈譴責沈慶京在看守所介護病房遭受非人道對待（被手銬、腳鐐及鐵鏈鎖在病床上），並批評檢察官林俊言在視察時無視此種違背人權之處境。","video_id":"X9M3axM1LIU","raw_text_key":"text/X9M3axM1LIU/raw/chunk_0012.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/X9M3axM1LIU/cleaned/chunk_0012.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/X9M3axM1LIU:chunk_0012","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/X9M3axM1LIU:chunk_0012/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/X9M3axM1LIU:chunk_0012/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/X9M3axM1LIU:chunk_0012/cleaned","session":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/sessions/X9M3axM1LIU","case":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/cases/113年度金訴字第51號"}}