{"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_0025.txt","chunk_index":25,"documents_referenced":["陳嘉明扣案筆電之Excel表格"],"end_seconds":7675,"keywords":["公益活動","利益交換","實際負責人","支配權","空殼協會"],"legal_issues":["應曉薇是否對華夏協會具有實際支配或管理權限","是否構成以職務對價為目的之利益交換","涉案協會是否為收受款項之空殼組織","私人記錄之Excel表格是否可作為認定管理權之證據"],"legal_issues_raw":["是否構成以職務對價為目的之利益交換","涉案協會是否為收受款項之空殼組織","應曉薇是否對華夏協會具有實際支配或管理權限","私人記錄之Excel表格是否可作為認定管理權之證據"],"participants":["於雪紅","應曉薇","沈慶京","王尊凱","陳嘉明"],"participants_raw":["應曉薇","沈慶京","於雪紅","王尊凱","陳嘉明"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0025","session_date":"2025-12-24","session_id":"koSUntQfpmY","session_part":"上午","start_seconds":7375,"summary":"本段文字旨在反駁公訴方關於應曉薇控制五個空殼協會以收受沈慶京匯款之指控。辯方主張應曉薇與沈慶京係因公益理念契合而成為好友，並非利益交換。針對「華夏協會」，辯方提出該協會自民國91年成立以來有具體公益實績，且實際負責人為王尊凱，而非應曉薇。此外，針對陳嘉明筆記中將協會與應曉薇相關單位列於同一欄位之證據，辯方主張該表僅為私人記錄，不具備證明應曉薇擁有支配權之法律效力。","video_id":"koSUntQfpmY","raw_text_key":"text/koSUntQfpmY/raw/chunk_0025.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/koSUntQfpmY/cleaned/chunk_0025.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0025","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0025/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0025/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/koSUntQfpmY:chunk_0025/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"}}