{"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_0012.txt","chunk_index":12,"documents_referenced":["內政部函釋","國際電影公司與柯文哲之合約（新媒體影音平台行銷及策略規劃服務合約）","檢察官起訴書","監察院函釋","相關筆錄","調查局調查報告"],"end_seconds":3840,"keywords":["公益侵佔","剩餘款","商業投資","政治獻金","服務合約","黨務支出"],"legal_issues":["支付款項之性質認定（商業投資 vs. 勞務服務/黨務支出）","政治獻金剩餘款項之使用是否構成公益侵佔罪","檢方是否採納有利於被告之行政函釋與證據"],"legal_issues_raw":["政治獻金剩餘款項之使用是否構成公益侵佔罪","支付款項之性質認定（商業投資 vs. 勞務服務/黨務支出）","檢方是否採納有利於被告之行政函釋與證據"],"participants":["柯文哲","檢方","許府（民眾黨文宣部主任）","辯護人","邱富生"],"participants_raw":["辯護人","柯文哲","邱富生","許府（民眾黨文宣部主任）","檢方"],"phase":"言詞辯論","record_type":"segment","segment_id":"xV6hqj2Ybds:chunk_0012","session_date":"2025-12-23","session_id":"xV6hqj2Ybds","session_part":"下午","start_seconds":3540,"summary":"辯護人針對柯文哲涉嫌侵佔政治獻金之指控進行辯護。首先主張將剩餘款項支付給協助處理帳務之人員（如顧林飛）符合監察院與內政部函釋，不構成公益侵佔；其次針對檢方指控之一百萬元「投資」邱富生國際電影公司一事，辯方主張該款項實為支付「新媒體影音平台行銷及策略規劃」之服務費用，旨在整合政黨聲量，屬於黨務支出而非個人營利投資，並以合約內容（缺乏股權、分紅等投資要素）證明其非投資行為。","video_id":"xV6hqj2Ybds","raw_text_key":"text/xV6hqj2Ybds/raw/chunk_0012.txt","cleaned_text_key":"text/xV6hqj2Ybds/cleaned/chunk_0012.txt","_links":{"self":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/xV6hqj2Ybds:chunk_0012","read":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/xV6hqj2Ybds:chunk_0012/read","raw":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/xV6hqj2Ybds:chunk_0012/raw","cleaned":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/segments/xV6hqj2Ybds:chunk_0012/cleaned","session":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/sessions/xV6hqj2Ybds","case":"https://5pwpri46fd.execute-api.ap-east-2.amazonaws.com/cases/113年度金訴字第51號"}}