{"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_0031.txt","chunk_index":31,"documents_referenced":["帳冊檔 (證據)","檢察官起訴書"],"end_seconds":9445,"keywords":["帳冊證據","收賄","特性性文書","舉證不足","行賄","逼供"],"legal_issues":["檢察官舉證責任是否充足 (舉證不足)","行賄與收賄之犯罪構成要件 (缺乏交付之事實證明)","證據之可採性與證明力 (特性性文書之認定)"],"legal_issues_raw":["檢察官舉證責任是否充足 (舉證不足)","證據之可採性與證明力 (特性性文書之認定)","行賄與收賄之犯罪構成要件 (缺乏交付之事實證明)"],"participants":["林俊廷","柯文哲","檢察官","沈慶京","辯護律師"],"participants_raw":["辯護律師","檢察官 (被提及)","沈慶京 (被告/被提及)","柯文哲 (被告/被提及)","林俊廷檢察官 (被提及)"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"sO8SNz7mXis:chunk_0031","session_date":"2025-12-17","session_id":"sO8SNz7mXis","session_part":"下午","start_seconds":9145,"summary":"辯方律師針對檢察官就沈慶京涉嫌交付1500萬現金予柯文哲之行賄指控提出強烈質疑。律師主張檢方缺乏直接證據（如金鈔、錄音、監聽或汙點證人），且起訴書中對交付時間與地點之描述模糊。針對檢方唯一依據的「帳冊」證據，律師認為該文件不符合「特性性文書」之法律要件（缺乏經年累月、機械式反覆記載），且從帳冊邏輯分析，捐款人與介紹人之區分顯示該筆款項並非由沈慶京交付。","video_id":"sO8SNz7mXis","raw_text_key":"text/sO8SNz7mXis/raw/chunk_0031.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/sO8SNz7mXis/cleaned/chunk_0031.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/sO8SNz7mXis:chunk_0031","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/sO8SNz7mXis:chunk_0031/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/sO8SNz7mXis:chunk_0031/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/sO8SNz7mXis:chunk_0031/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"}}