法學期刊
論著名稱: 兩漢春秋折獄「原心定罪」的刑法理論(The Criminal Law Theory of the "Chunqiu Jueyu" Case Decisions in the Chinese Han Dynasty)
編著譯者: 黃源盛
出版日期: 2005.06
刊登出處: 台灣/政大法學評論第 85 期 /59-132 頁
頁  數: 41 點閱次數: 960
下載點數: 164 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 黃源盛
關 鍵 詞: 春秋折獄原心定罪主觀與客觀董仲舒誅心論
中文摘要: 世人論斷漢代「春秋折獄」有兩極化的傾向,而以負面評價者居多,何以致之?本文試圖追本溯源,例舉實證,並從刑法理論史的角度出發,作另一側面的觀察。表面上,春秋折獄的運用類型大致可粗分為二:一為董仲舒的春秋折獄案例,另一為董仲舒以外文法吏的引經決獄實例;其中,又可再細分為關涉政治性的案件與非關政治確信的尋常刑案。實際上,春秋折獄仿效《公羊春秋》褒貶的筆削法,迂迴地以:一、善因惡果;二、惡因善果;三、惡因未果;四、惡因惡果等類型,作為定罪量刑的理論根據,且以之為推闡律意的方法。而究其實,整個問題的關鍵在司讞者的「證據」如何取得?證據力的強弱及其虛實,如何權衡?本文深入其間,層層推進,最終得出本其事、原其志的「正常春秋折獄」與借名專斷、引喻失義的「不正常春秋折獄」兩面評價。當然,以今論古不免陷於法史研究方法之偏,之所以不避其嫌,悠遊縱橫其間,乃覺此事今古本相通,亦行方便法門之不得不也。
英文關鍵詞: Chunqiu JueyuJudgment by Initial MotivationSubjectivism and ObjectivismDong Zhong-shu
英文摘要: In today’s academic studies of the Sinology, the commentaries on the “Chunqiy Jueyu”, or “Case Decisions based on the Spring and Autumn Annals” in the Han dynasty are contradictory. Most of them are negative. To trace the reasons, this paper examines the judicial practice in the Han dynasty, and sets an observation with the aspect of theoretical history of criminal law.
Superficially, there are two kinds of practical applications in the “Chunqiu Jueyu”, one is the case decisions made by the great philosopher “Dong Zhong-shu”, and the other is the case decisions made by other officials and servicemen. Both have invoked traditional Chinese classics-especially the “Gongyang Commentary of the Spring and Autumn Annals” has been used as judgments on hard cases. To delicately examine the Han cases on hand, all cases should furthermore be classified as politics-involved or non-politics-involved. The “Chunqiu Jueyu” has imitated the “Gongyang Commentary of the Spring and Autumn Annals” to attain justice in the imperial periods. Thereafter, there were four types of judicial operations that have been set down to establish standards for crime-judgment and punishment-allocation. They were: harmful results caused by non-evil intended actions, beneficial results as the consequence of evil intended actions, harmless results caused by evil intended actions, and harmful results caused by evil-intended actions. It is understandable that the erected standards have also been adopted to interpret the statute in a sentence.
Practically, the key to judge crimes and punishments in the judicial process is evidence. But how could the exact evidence be obtained? And how could the validity of an evidence be proofed?
To deal with the above questions, this paper points out that there are two kinds of “Chunqiu Jueyu” case decisions in the Han dynasty. The first one could be named a “normal” Chunqiu Jueyu. Its judgment is based on the outcome of a wrongdoing. However, it finds out the initial motivation of the wrongdoer, and inclines to release the accused without charge when one’s intent is genuinely without evil. The other could be named an “abnormal” Chunqiu Jueyu, which is based on the official authority with an arbitrary judicial power, inclines to create or increase punishments to an innocent defendant. Thus the commentaries to the “Ghunqiu Jueyu” are contradictory.
Readers may suspect that using today’s concept to deal with the ancient judicial cases is not fair for the study of legal history. But as many today’s cases are so analogy to ancient cases, utilizing today’s concept approach method is deemed acceptable.
目  次: 壹、序說-一段四十多年前的法史爭議往事
貳、刑法史上主觀主義與客觀主義的論爭
一、歐陸近代法史上的主客觀流派之爭
二、中國古代法上的主觀說與客觀說
參、春秋折獄「原心定罪」案例評析
一、董仲舒春秋折獄案例
二、兩漢春秋折獄案例
肆、公羊學派影響下春秋折獄罪刑適用的特色
一、動機論與結果論的對立-其心可誅乎?其行可誅乎?
二、倫理義務與法律責任的牽混-未然之罪應如何論處?
伍、春秋折獄罪同異論的理論基礎與方法
一、「原心定罪」刑罰適用的理論基礎
二、罪同異論的評判基準及其流弊
陸、結論-「原心定罪」的歷史與時代意義
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
相關論著:
    返回功能列