清代“教唆词讼”律文及其在司法中的适用

发布时间：2018-06-25 12:10

本文选题：教唆词讼 + 代写呈词　；参考：《中央民族大学》2011年硕士论文

【摘要】：“教唆词讼”是《大清律例》中的一条法律,其渊源最早可以追溯到唐代《唐律疏议·斗讼》中的“为人作辞碟加状”、“教令人告事虚”两条；至《宋刑统》中则将唐律关于禁止讼师的两条并为“为人作辞牒——教令人告事虚”；《大明律》始以“教唆词讼”为名,重定刑罚；清代律文沿袭明律,而例的内容在清代各朝略有损益,并且对教唆词讼者的惩处也呈现日渐加重的趋势。本文共五章,第一章为绪论,主要是对本文研究对象和研究现状的简要概括,指明本文主要是对清代“教唆词讼”条文及相关案例的研究。第二章是介绍“教唆词讼”条的沿革,主要是对唐明律中的规定进行了详细的梳理,并对各条进行文理解释。着重对唐明律中对教唆词讼者的不同规定以及处罚原则的不同进行比较,进而不第三章对清律中“教唆词讼”的规定做好铺垫。第三章是对清代“教唆词讼”律例条文的详细梳理,特别是打破《大清律例》中所勘定的例文的先后顺序,按照雍正、乾隆、嘉庆三朝的时间顺序的标准对教唆词讼例文的增删情况进行梳理,指明清代教唆词讼律主要是在乾隆朝勒定；在对律例条文进行文理分析的基础上,对唐清两代的法律规定进行比较,指明清代立法者的核心旨趣——“律贵诛心,法重造意”。第四章是对司法档案中与教唆词讼相关刑案通过表格的形式进行归纳整理,结合其中的典型案例分析清代案件审理过程中是官方是如何认定教唆词讼者的,归纳出其认定教唆词讼者的主要标准有“敛财包讼”、“代写呈词”、“教唆诬告”和“教唆京控”,这四点只要居其一则必入清律之严惩,也反映出清代在案件审断过程中对教唆词讼者采取了一种入罪式的策略；同时,在简要介绍清代的刑罚体系之后,通过数据的分类整理和分析,发现清代教唆词讼案件的处罚呈现出高度集中于满徒、军流刑二者上,这也反映出清代对教唆词讼者处罚地严厉程度。最后一章是本文的结论部分,在归纳出结论后,将结论与前人的研究成果进行了分析比对,发现其间的矛盾之处。在对前人的研究进行简要分析后,指出其本身所存在的不足,并引述了苏成捷的观点对矛盾之处进行了简要的说明。教唆词讼,是清代对唆讼者进行打击的一项重要规定,虽然有人认为它打击的主要对象是讼师,但从本文看来其面向的对象更为广泛,远远超出了讼师的范畴；并且清代对唆讼者的惩罚的严酷程度,也难以让人服膺清代法律存在“表达与实践”的通说。本文严格遵循法律解释及分析法学的研究方法,并未引入其他分析工具,虽然可能存在研究方法单一的不足,但这种简单且直接的方法又何尝不是直达真相的捷径。
[Abstract]:"Instigating the lawsuit" is a law in the law of the Great Qing Dynasty. Its origin can be traced back to the Tang Dynasty "the law of the Tang Dynasty", "the lawsuit >" in the Tang Dynasty. "The order of the person is added", "the order of the decree of the decree" is two. In the name of "instigating the word case", the penalty was redefined, and the law of the Qing Dynasty followed the Ming Law, and the contents of the examples were slightly profit and loss in the Qing Dynasty, and the punishment of the instigator was also increasingly aggravated.
This article is a total of five chapters. The first chapter is the introduction, which is mainly a brief summary of the object of this study and the present situation of the study. The article indicates that this article is mainly the study of the "Instigation" articles and related cases in the Qing Dynasty. The second chapter introduces the evolution of the "instigator" article, mainly combing the provisions of Tang Minglv and entering into various articles. The article makes a comparison between the different provisions and the punishment principles of the instigator in the Tang and Ming laws, and then the third chapters make a good paving for the provisions of the "Instigation" in the Qing Dynasty. The third chapter is the detailed combing of the provisions of the law of the "Instigation" in the Qing Dynasty. According to the order of the time sequence of Yong Zheng, Qian Long and Jiaqing three dynasties, the order of the time sequence of the three dynasties was combed, which indicated that the law of the instigation of the Qing Dynasty was mainly in Qian Long's Dynasty; on the basis of the literary and rational analysis of the provisions of the laws, the legal provisions of the two dynasties in the Tang and Qing Dynasties were compared and the legislation of the Qing Dynasty was pointed out. The fourth chapter is to summarize and collate the forms of the criminal cases related to the instigation in the judicial archives through the form of the form, and analyze the typical cases in the process of the trial of the Qing Dynasty. The four points should be punished in the Qing Dynasty. At the same time, after a brief introduction of the punishment system of the Qing Dynasty, the data was classified and adjusted after a brief introduction of the Qing Dynasty's penalty system. It is found that the punishment of the instigation of cases in the Qing Dynasty is highly concentrated on the full apprentice and the two persons in the army, which also reflects the severity of the punishment to the instigator of the Qing Dynasty. The last chapter is the conclusion part of this article. After concluding the conclusion, the conclusion is compared with the previous research results and finds the contradiction between them. After a brief analysis of the previous studies, it points out the shortcomings of its own and gives a brief explanation of the contradiction in Su Chengjie's view.
Instigating a lawsuit is an important provision in the Qing Dynasty to attack the instigator. Although some people think that the main object of the attack is the lawsuit teacher, it seems to be more extensive in this article, far beyond the category of the lawsuit teacher; and the Yan Kucheng degree of the punishment of the instigator in the Qing Dynasty is also difficult to convince people to express the law of the Qing Dynasty. This article strictly follows the method of legal interpretation and analysis of jurisprudence, and does not introduce other analytical tools. Although there may be a single lack of research methods, this simple and direct method is not a shortcut to the truth.
【学位授予单位】：中央民族大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D929

【参考文献】