法學期刊.
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 唐律不應得為罪的當代思考(A Contemporary View on the “Doing What Ought Not to Be Done” statute of the T’ang Code)
編著譯者: 黃源盛
出版日期: 2004.06
刊登出處: 台灣/法制史研究第 5 期 /1-59 頁
頁  數: 36 點閱次數: 991
下載點數: 144 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 黃源盛
關 鍵 詞: 不應得為唐律罪刑法定禮與刑立法技術
中文摘要: 在傳統中國刑律中,有一名為「不應得為罪」者,其涵義係指律、令雖無專條禁止,但據「理」不可為的行為。此類行為,無所不包,難以概舉,要之,皆屬違反當時代「禮」與「理」的社會價值觀念者。也就是說,一切違背倫理義務的反道義行為,或違反基本生活秩序的行為,若不能運用輕重相舉條,又毫無比附之餘地時,為落實情罪平允的實質正義理念,皆可歸入「不應得為」,而援引此條予以科罰。
以《唐律》言,「不應得為罪」形式上列在〈雜律篇〉之末,屬於所謂的「正條」,惟其內容則大異其它正條之趣。在英文翻譯上,有人將其譯為「catch-all statute」,其立法用意實在耐人尋味。想問的是:「不應得為」條的法源可溯自何時?處罰的根據何在?律令既無明確犯罪的構成要件,其「應」與「不應」的界限究竟在哪?違反事理「輕」與「重」的基準又在哪?如何從《唐律疏議》本身的疏釋例示,來正確解讀其涵義?而從現存的斷簡殘編判文中能否窺見其運作實態?從當代刑法觀念,可能聯想到那些相關問題?它對後世的中國及近鄰的日本又產生了何等影響?
凡此疑問,皆屬帝制中國刑律之要者,而中外法史學界相關的論述相當少見,即使有,也多語焉不詳;本文嚐試深入律意,舉例闡釋,並參酌近世刑法原理,企圖作較詳盡與突破性的申義與論理。
英文關鍵詞: Doing What Ought Not to Be Donethe T’ang CodeRitual and Punishmentnullum crimen sine legenulla poena sine legeLegislative techniques
英文摘要: The judicial procedure of imperial China required that the citation of a relevant statute or ordinance always accompany the pronouncement of sentence. Because most laws tended to be narrowly specific, judges were frequently confronted by cases whose circumstances were not clearly covered by any existing statutes or ordinances. The major device for coping with this problem was the application of law by analogy. In addition, several so-called “catch-all statutes” were adopted, of which the “doing what ought not to be done” statute was the most commonly used for relatively minor infractions. By this, individuals convicted of doing what ought not to be done received a punishment of 40 blows of the light bamboo for minor infractions or 80 blows of the heavy bamboo for serious infractions.
In the general format of the T’ang Code, the “ought not” statute was positioned at the end of the tenth division entitled “the Miscellaneous Statutes” (tsa lü). It was a regular statute like other substantial ones formally in the code, but was very marvelous exactly. Putting into effect the traditional idea of “let the punishment fit the crime”, any acts which disregarded the “li” (ritual; etiquette) or contradicted the “Ii” (reason; right) were considered to be “ought not”. The statute was aimed at all acts that diverged from social order or violated ethical or moral duties. These were acts that, though not specifically prohibited, were deemed reprehensible by the authority. There is no doubt that, the “ought not” statute contradicts the contemporary thinking of the “nullum crimen sine lege; nulla poena sine lege” principle.
From a contemporary perspective, serious of questions arise: When did the “ought not” statute begin? What was the real purpose of this legislation? How was the punishment determined? As there were no explicit conditions to define the crime of “doing ought not”, what did “ought” and “ought not” really mean? What were the standards of “seriousness” in situation and reason? How were the explanation and examples in the “T’ang-lu-shu-yi” (T’ang Code with Commentary) used to understand the real meaning of the statute? How can we determine the exact practice of the statute using the extant T’ang documents which are only marginally relative to judicial practice? By invoking the principles of contemporary criminal law, what problems can we clarify? How did this statute’s influence later dynasties and other countries, for instance, Japan?
To date the “ought not” statute has rarely been studied; the goal of the present paper is to understand the issues set out above.
目  次: 壹、序說
貳、不應得為罪的歷史淵源及其理論基礎
一、律條溯源
二、處罰根據
參、唐律不應得為罪的義理與實際
一、律文釋義
二、律疏定例舉隅
三、運用實態
肆、從近世刑法原理聯想唐律不應得為罪
一、從不應得為罪透視唐律罪刑法定的虛與實
二、從不應得為罪探討唐律禮與刑的糾葛
三、從不應得為罪考察唐律罪的概念與立法技術
伍、結論-不應得為罪對後世的影響及其流變
相關法條:
    相關判解:
      相關函釋:
        相關論著:
        返回功能列