{"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_0019.txt","chunk_index":19,"documents_referenced":["監察院糾正文","都委會第775次出言意見"],"end_seconds":5905,"keywords":["京華城","出言意見","協調會","濫用職權","行政中立","都委會"],"legal_issues":["應曉薇是否濫用市議員職權施壓公務員","都委會幕僚撰寫出言意見是否受外部干預而喪失中立性","都發局展延之行政行為是否屬職權範圍"],"legal_issues_raw":["應曉薇是否濫用市議員職權施壓公務員","都發局展延之行政行為是否屬職權範圍","都委會幕僚撰寫出言意見是否受外部干預而喪失中立性"],"participants":["公訴方","劉秀玲","應曉薇","檢察官","胡芳瓊","蔡立瑞","黃景茂"],"participants_raw":["應曉薇","黃景茂","劉秀玲","胡芳瓊","蔡立瑞","公訴方","檢察官"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0019","session_date":"2025-12-24","session_id":"koSUntQfpmY","session_part":"上午","start_seconds":5605,"summary":"本段文字針對應曉薇是否濫用職權施壓都發局及都委會之指控進行辯論。內容涵蓋109年展延之職權行使、110年1月6日協調會之發言性質，以及都委會幕僚在撰寫出言意見時是否受壓力的爭議。證人（劉秀玲、胡芳瓊、蔡立瑞）均證稱應曉薇之詢問屬合理公務範圍，且幕僚撰寫意見係本於專業中立，並未受壓而調整內容。","video_id":"koSUntQfpmY","raw_text_key":"text/koSUntQfpmY/raw/chunk_0019.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/koSUntQfpmY/cleaned/chunk_0019.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0019","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0019/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0019/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0019/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"}}