{"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":["109年4月6日都發局簽核公文","會前會擬決議簡報檔","起訴書","都委會第765次會議研議案"],"end_seconds":4430,"keywords":["京華城","施壓","研議案","行政裁量","證詞矛盾","都委會"],"legal_issues":["應曉薇是否利用民意代表身分對都發局及都委會施壓或不當干預行政裁量","研議案之法律性質是否具有準駁之效力","證人（彭振聲）證詞之一致性與可信度（證據能力與證明力）"],"legal_issues_raw":["應曉薇是否利用民意代表身分對都發局及都委會施壓或不當干預行政裁量","研議案之法律性質是否具有準駁之效力","證人（彭振聲）證詞之一致性與可信度（證據能力與證明力）"],"participants":["劉秀玲","嚴邦睿","張莉莉","張藝軒","彭振聲","應曉薇","朱誠","柯文哲","楊智勝","沈慶京","胡芳瓊","邵琇珮","黃景茂","黃莉莉"],"participants_raw":["應曉薇","柯文哲","彭振聲","胡芳瓊","劉秀玲","邵琇珮","沈慶京","張藝軒","朱誠","嚴邦睿","楊智勝","黃莉莉","張莉莉","黃景茂"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0014","session_date":"2025-12-24","session_id":"koSUntQfpmY","session_part":"上午","start_seconds":4130,"summary":"本段文字針對應曉薇是否在京華城案中施壓都發局及都委會進行辯論。重點在於：109年4月6日的簽核過程中，相關公務員均否認受壓；都委會幕僚胡芳瓊澄清其先前關於「承受壓力」的說法用詞不精準且非親眼所見。關於765次會議，辯方主張研議案不具法律效力，且彭振聲對於應曉薇是否要求「緩一緩」的證詞前後矛盾，缺乏補強證據，不足以認定應曉薇有施壓或違法干預之行為。","video_id":"koSUntQfpmY","raw_text_key":"text/koSUntQfpmY/raw/chunk_0014.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/koSUntQfpmY/cleaned/chunk_0014.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0014","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0014/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0014/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0014/cleaned","session":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/sessions/koSUntQfpmY","case":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/cases/113年度金訴字第51號"}}