{"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_0023.txt","chunk_index":23,"documents_referenced":["《都市計畫法》第二十四條","《都管條例》第八十條之二","公訴書","錄音譯文"],"end_seconds":7085,"keywords":["京華城案","便當會","政策質疑","行政中立","請託","都委會"],"legal_issues":["是否對公務員或柯文哲施壓以影響京華城案審議結果","是否構成濫用議員權力干預行政機關（行政中立）","證據之真實性（關於LINE訊息之傳遞路徑與扣押手機之查驗結果）"],"legal_issues_raw":["是否構成濫用議員權力干預行政機關（行政中立）","是否對公務員或柯文哲施壓以影響京華城案審議結果","證據之真實性（關於LINE訊息之傳遞路徑與扣押手機之查驗結果）"],"participants":["應曉薇之辯護人（吳律師）","法官（庭長）"],"participants_raw":["被告應曉薇之辯護人（吳律師）","法官（庭長）"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0023","session_date":"2025-12-24","session_id":"koSUntQfpmY","session_part":"上午","start_seconds":6785,"summary":"本段逐字稿為被告應曉薇辯護人的陳述，旨在反駁公訴人指控應曉薇利用議員權力施壓、干預都委會審議京華城案。辯方主張應曉薇在便當會中的發言屬於政策性質疑與監督，針對審議邏輯與規範一致性提出疑問，而非針對個人施壓；且強調柯文哲已證述未受壓力，都委會審議結果由委員共同決定，並否認透過LINE訊息向市長室請託，主張公訴人指控缺乏證據且與實務不符。","video_id":"koSUntQfpmY","raw_text_key":"text/koSUntQfpmY/raw/chunk_0023.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/koSUntQfpmY/cleaned/chunk_0023.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0023","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0023/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0023/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0023/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"}}