本文關(guān)鍵詞： 疑案處理原則 疑則從無 疑則從輕 疑則從議　出處：《天津商業(yè)大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：中國古代疑難案件分為疑罪、疑獄兩種類型，對疑難案件的如何處理關(guān)系著是否可以合理公正的處理問題、是否可以良好的維護(hù)社會秩序。通過對我國古代有關(guān)疑罪、疑獄的文獻(xiàn)、法規(guī)的梳理，發(fā)現(xiàn)中國古代對疑案的處理原則大致可以歸納為三類：疑則從無原則；疑則從輕原則；疑則從議原則。本文采取實證的研究方法分析司法官員對疑罪、疑獄的處理方式，得出中國古代疑案處理原則形成了相對完備的體系。在中國古代儒法兩家相互融合、妥協(xié)的理論背景下，律、例相互補(bǔ)充又互相抵制，律、例賦予疑案處理原則權(quán)威性的同時，在司法實踐中對疑獄的處理原則的適用又具有選擇性。雖然中國古代疑案處理原則是在有罪推定的基礎(chǔ)上進(jìn)行，但其不管是理論背景、立法、司法實踐，均相對完備，對我國立法、司法具有參考價值。 本文除前沿和結(jié)論外共有四部分： 第一章，中國古代疑案處理原則的概況。主要介紹疑則從無原則、疑則從輕原則、疑則從議原則形成以及延續(xù)的歷史過程。 第二章，中國古代疑案處理的司法實踐。選取西漢，，曹魏，吳，晉，南朝，唐，明，清等朝代的疑案，將疑案分為疑罪、疑獄兩種類型進(jìn)行研究。 第三章，中國古代疑案處理原則的評析。通過對第二章中國古代疑案處理的司法實踐的分析研究得出：疑案處理原則的適用范圍；疑則從輕原則為統(tǒng)治者之首推既與儒家中庸、慎刑思想相關(guān)又與儒法兩家的沖突與妥協(xié)密不可分；疑獄一般不適用疑則從輕原則，其對疑則從輕原則的適用具有特殊性；疑案處理原則由于意含有罪推定、疑罪審理程序凸顯司法集權(quán)、定罪標(biāo)準(zhǔn)偏低等原因而造成了大量的冤假錯案；判例確立和維護(hù)疑案處理法律原則。 第四章，中國古代疑案處理原則的啟示。中國現(xiàn)代疑罪適用疑則從無原則，摒棄古代疑則從輕原則，但在中國現(xiàn)代司法實踐中仍受古代疑則從輕思想的影響；中國現(xiàn)代對疑案的規(guī)定以及處理都比較簡單，本文建議借鑒中國古代疑獄“量刑從輕”的處理方式，等。
[Abstract]:The difficult cases in ancient China can be divided into two types: suspected crime and suspected prison. How to deal with the difficult cases is related to whether or not the problem can be dealt with reasonably and fairly. Whether we can maintain the social order well. Through combing the ancient literature on suspicion of crime, suspected prison, laws and regulations, we find that the principles of handling the suspected cases in ancient China can be summed up into three categories: suspicion from no principle; The principle of doubt is lenient; This article adopts the empirical research method to analyze how the judicial officials deal with the suspected crime and the suspected prison. It is concluded that the principles of handling Chinese ancient suspicious cases formed a relatively complete system. In the context of the integration and compromise of the two schools of Confucianism and law in ancient China, law, examples complement each other and resist each other. While giving authority to the principle of handling suspected cases, the application of the principle of dealing with suspected cases in judicial practice is selective, although the principle of handling suspected cases in ancient China is carried out on the basis of presumption of guilt. However, its theoretical background, legislation and judicial practice are relatively complete, which has reference value for legislation and judicature in our country. In addition to the frontier and conclusion, there are four parts in this paper: The first chapter is the general situation of the principles of handling suspicious cases in ancient China. It mainly introduces the historical process of the formation and continuation of doubt from the principle of discussion, the principle of doubt from non-principle, the principle of doubt from light, and the principle of doubt from discussion. The second chapter, the judicial practice of Chinese ancient suspicious cases. Select the Western Han Dynasty, Cao Wei, Wu, Jin, Southern Dynasty, Tang, Ming, Qing dynasties and other dynasties. The third chapter, the analysis and analysis of the principles of handling suspicious cases in ancient China. Through the analysis and research on the judicial practice of dealing with the suspected cases in the second chapter, the author draws the following conclusions: the scope of application of the principle of handling suspicious cases; The principle of doubt as the first choice of rulers is not only related to the Confucian mean, but also to the conflict and compromise between Confucianism and law. The principle of doubt is not applicable to doubt, and its application to the principle of doubt is special. The principle of handling a suspicious case contains the presumption of crime, the trial procedure of suspected crime highlights the centralization of judicial power, and the standard of conviction is low, which results in a large number of false and false cases. Jurisprudence establishes and upholds the legal principles of handling doubtful cases. Chapter 4th, the enlightenment of the principle of handling suspicious cases in ancient China. The application of suspicion in modern China is from no principle, but it is still influenced by the thought of lighter in Chinese modern judicial practice. The rules and handling of suspected cases in modern China are relatively simple. This paper suggests to draw lessons from the treatment of "sentencing leniently" in ancient China.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：天津商業(yè)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D929

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條

1 馮卓慧;;中國古代慎刑思想研究——兼與20世紀(jì)西方慎刑思想比較[J];法律科學(xué)-西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報;2006年02期

2 俞毅剛;存疑有利于被告原則的理解與適用兼談幾則案例的處理[J];法律適用;2004年08期

3 鄭牧民;易海輝;;論中國古代證據(jù)制度的基本特點[J];湖南科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2007年02期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 李桂琴;疑罪從無原則之司法實現(xiàn)[D];吉林大學(xué);2007年

2 王鈾;無罪推定的邏輯分析[D];河南大學(xué);2008年

3 孫明;存疑判決現(xiàn)象研究[D];蘇州大學(xué);2006年

本文編號：1449830