{"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_0032.txt","chunk_index":32,"documents_referenced":["林俊廷之論告","柯文哲行事曆","行收會決議（民國109年2月20日）","陳思毅檢察官之時序表"],"end_seconds":9740,"keywords":["偵查缺失","政治獻金","行賄","證據認定","隆基獎勵","隧道視野"],"legal_issues":["偵查程序之完整性（是否盡到調查其他嫌疑人的義務）","行賄之主觀目的與時間軸之因果關係認定","證據之整體判斷與認定（關於「沈慶京」身分之認定）","隧道視野（Tunnel Vision）之法律認知錯誤及其對心證之影響"],"legal_issues_raw":["證據之整體判斷與認定（關於「沈慶京」身分之認定）","偵查程序之完整性（是否盡到調查其他嫌疑人的義務）","隧道視野（Tunnel Vision）之法律認知錯誤及其對心證之影響","行賄之主觀目的與時間軸之因果關係認定"],"participants":["柯文哲","檢察官","沈慶京","辯護律師","陳思毅"],"participants_raw":["辯護律師","檢察官（被提及）","柯文哲（被提及）","沈慶京（被提及）","陳思毅檢察官（被提及）"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"sO8SNz7mXis:chunk_0032","session_date":"2025-12-17","session_id":"sO8SNz7mXis","session_part":"下午","start_seconds":9440,"summary":"辯方律師針對檢察官在處理柯文哲涉嫌收受一千五百萬款項及應曉薇捐款案件中的偵查缺失進行辯論。律師主張檢察官僅將證據中的「沈慶京」認定為沈慶京，而忽略了對其他可能相關人士（如沈正南、沈富雄、沈志祥、沈發慧、沈柏陽等）的調查，批評檢察官陷入「隧道視野（Tunnel Vision）」的認知錯誤，導致偵查方向單一且存在冤錯案風險。此外，針對應曉薇的捐款，律師質疑檢察官對行賄目的與時間軸的認定有誤，認為其時序表不正確，無法證明捐款與獲取隆基獎勵之間有因果關係。","video_id":"sO8SNz7mXis","raw_text_key":"text/sO8SNz7mXis/raw/chunk_0032.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/sO8SNz7mXis/cleaned/chunk_0032.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/sO8SNz7mXis:chunk_0032","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/sO8SNz7mXis:chunk_0032/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/sO8SNz7mXis:chunk_0032/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/sO8SNz7mXis:chunk_0032/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"}}