{"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_0021.txt","chunk_index":21,"documents_referenced":["起訴書"],"end_seconds":6495,"keywords":["公務員","庭上證述","施壓","京華城公司","罰站","虛構事實"],"legal_issues":["被告是否利用職權或手段（如罰站、責罵）施壓公務員","被告是否要求公務員對特定公司（京華城公司）進行護航"],"legal_issues_raw":["被告是否利用職權或手段（如罰站、責罵）施壓公務員","被告是否要求公務員對特定公司（京華城公司）進行護航"],"participants":["公訴人","劉秀玲","吳順民","張立麗","應曉薇","蔡立瑞","郭太奇"],"participants_raw":["應曉薇（被告/議員）","公訴人","郭太奇（證人）","劉秀玲（證人/公務員）","蔡立瑞（證人/公務員）","張立麗（證人/公務員）","吳順民"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0021","session_date":"2025-12-24","session_id":"koSUntQfpmY","session_part":"上午","start_seconds":6195,"summary":"本段文字為辯方針對公訴人指控應曉薇議員施壓公務員之反駁。針對「要求公務員罰站」、「責罵公務員」以及「要求護航京華城公司」三項指控，辯方引用證人（劉秀玲、蔡立瑞、郭太奇、張立麗）之庭上證詞，證明「罰站」僅為公務員間之術語而非事實，且應曉薇之語氣僅為急促而非責罵，亦無要求護航之事實，主張公訴書內容係虛構且具惡意。","video_id":"koSUntQfpmY","raw_text_key":"text/koSUntQfpmY/raw/chunk_0021.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/koSUntQfpmY/cleaned/chunk_0021.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0021","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0021/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0021/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0021/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"}}