{"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_0026.txt","chunk_index":26,"documents_referenced":["李德權之便利貼","胡芳瓊與游秀林之對話內容","行政訴訟法（提及第一百六十條，應為指涉證據認定之原則）","起訴書","陳俊源與朱亞虎之對話內容","黃景茂之刑事地圖"],"end_seconds":7970,"keywords":["共同犯意聯絡","密室逼供","推測之詞","論告","證據不足","貪汙治罪條例"],"legal_issues":["推測性陳述（推斷）是否可作為法律證據（引用行政訴訟法相關原則及最高法院見解）","檢察官是否涉嫌密室逼供及程序違法","證據之關聯性與證明力（證據是否足以支持起訴事實）","非公務員（沈慶京）是否成立《貪汙治罪條例》第六條第一項第四款之共同正犯（需論證與公務員之共同犯意聯絡）"],"legal_issues_raw":["檢察官是否涉嫌密室逼供及程序違法","非公務員（沈慶京）是否成立《貪汙治罪條例》第六條第一項第四款之共同正犯（需論證與公務員之共同犯意聯絡）","推測性陳述（推斷）是否可作為法律證據（引用行政訴訟法相關原則及最高法院見解）","證據之關聯性與證明力（證據是否足以支持起訴事實）"],"participants":["廖彥均","朱亞虎","李德權","林俊彥","柯文哲","沈慶京","游秀林","胡芳瓊","辯護人（發言者）","陳俊源","黃景茂"],"participants_raw":["辯護人（發言者）","廖彥均（檢察官）","林俊彥（檢察官）","柯文哲（被告）","沈慶京（被告）","朱亞虎（證人）","黃景茂","李德權","陳俊源","胡芳瓊","游秀林"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"sO8SNz7mXis:chunk_0026","session_date":"2025-12-17","session_id":"sO8SNz7mXis","session_part":"下午","start_seconds":7670,"summary":"辯護人針對檢方（特別是廖彥均、林俊彥檢察官）的辦案過程提出強烈質疑，指稱林俊彥檢察官涉嫌密室逼供且在出事後仍升官，質疑其背後有政治操作或高層指示。在法律論點上，辯方主張檢方無法證明柯文哲與沈慶京之間存在「共同犯意聯絡」，認為檢方依賴的證人（如朱亞虎）僅為推論而非證據，且現有之刑事地圖、便利貼及對話紀錄均無法證明兩人私下會面的具體交談內容，指責檢方論告內容僅為「佔言法」且試圖以大量不相關證據掩蓋實質證據之缺失。","video_id":"sO8SNz7mXis","raw_text_key":"text/sO8SNz7mXis/raw/chunk_0026.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/sO8SNz7mXis/cleaned/chunk_0026.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/sO8SNz7mXis:chunk_0026","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/sO8SNz7mXis:chunk_0026/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/sO8SNz7mXis:chunk_0026/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/sO8SNz7mXis:chunk_0026/cleaned","session":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/sessions/sO8SNz7mXis","case":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/cases/113年度金訴字第51號"}}