【作者】 栾时春；

【导师】 徐永康；

【作者基本信息】 华东政法大学 ， 法律史， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 宋代是我国传统证据制度的发达阶段，这一时期的证据制度对后世证据意识的形成，及证据的运用都有重要的影响。虽然近代以来对宋代的研究产生了许多具有重要学术价值的成果，但是目前系统研究宋代证据制度者还较少，这为本文的研究留下比较大的空间。本文基于实证研究和比较研究的思路，运用宋代的《名公书判清明集》、《折狱龟鉴》、《棠阴比事》等文献中的案例，结合《宋刑统》、《宋会要辑稿》、《庆元条法事类》等条令资料，概括宋代证据制度的特点，研究宋代证据的种类、调查、可采性审查及证据证明等内容，比较宋以前朝代证据制度对宋代证据的影响，挖掘宋代证据制度形成的基础，对宋代证据制度进行系统地研究。除导论和余论外，正文共分四章，其内容要点如下：第一章为宋代发达的证据种类。本章共将宋代的证据分为五种，分别是干连人、被告人口供、物证、书证和检验文书。宋代把原告与证人归为一类，称为干连人。作为干连人，原告可以诉状或口供的方式来作证。宋代对诉状的格式、内容、书写人、保识人等均作了规制。原告的口供，包括断案时勘鞫官的诘问口供和原告的被拷讯口供。宋代的证人处于被勾追的地位，且可以拷讯。具有容隐关系和达到一定身体条件的证人可以免予作证。妇女可以不必出庭当面作证。宋代强盗、杀人案件的邻里作为干连人，还有知情施救义务，并禁止与案件无干系的证人举告。宋代的干连人还包括可为勘鞫官答疑解惑的专家，且勘鞫中专家证言的证明力较强，容易得到认可。宋代在断案中被告人的口供占据极其重要的地位，从证明力角度将被告人的口供分为首实和自首。首实是被告到案后的如实供述罪行，宋代为确保被告人口供的真实、自愿，不仅需要记录每次讯问被告人的款词，对一些特殊的案件，款词还有特别规定，如大辟案件强调款词记录的规范性，贼盗案件的初次讯问要求记录重要的案情要件内容。在结案时还需要圆结案款，成款需与碎款相同。宋代已经意识到物证客观性对定罪量刑的重要性，因此宋代比较重视物证，甚至有时没有物证只有被告的口供，有的勘鞫官也不敢结案。宋代的物证种类繁多，从形态上大致可以分为物品、痕迹和人的身体。从司法实践中看，宋代将物证的证据作用发挥到最大。宋代的书证可以分为契约类、公文档案类、私人处分财产类和人身类。宋代书证制度最大的特色是对部分书证规定严格的形式要件，对重要的合同行为要求订立书面契约，如买卖重要生产资料契约、租赁土地契约、租赁官屋舍契约、人身买卖及雇佣契约等。宋代特别对田产典卖行为推行标准契约，对契约的内容、格式进行规制。宋代的检验文书主要指尸体检验文书。宋代并无专门的验伤单，对伤情也无轻、重伤的分类。伤情的检验结果直接写入审案文书中。宋代虽然有伤残的分级，但伤残并非检验的项目，其影响仅限于犯罪人的定罪量刑。在尸体检验中，宋代的成就举世皆知，制成了三种检验文书，验状、检验格目、尸体正背人形图。其中验状属于检验发现内容记录，检验格目为格式文书是检验过程的记载，尸体正背人形图是对检验发现的直观记录。宋代这三种检验文书，将验尸过程的检验内容和程序内容均作了记录，提高了检验文书的证明力。第二章为宋代的证据调查。证据调查包括证据调查措施和证据的可采性审查。证据的调查，主要包括讯问被告人，搜查、盘查，调查访问，现场查验。宋代对讯问被告人有严格规制，设定拷讯的启动条件。为防止酷刑，对拷讯工具的规格进行规制，要求制作狱具者签名花押。限定拷讯的部位和拷讯的次数、数量。在讯问时需讯问犯罪的细节内容。实务中勘鞫官非常注意勘鞫之术。宋代的搜查措施既有通常附随于公开抓捕后的公开搜查，也有随意启动的私密搜查。盘查多在城门处实施，城门守卫可以对过往的可疑之人进行盘问、检查。宋代的调查访问既有法定的调查访问又有裁定的调查访问。法定的调查访问通常附于尸检过程中。裁定的调查访问是根据案情需要查找知情人，既可以秘密开展，也可公开开展。宋代的现场查验，既包括刑事案件的现场勘查，也包括民事案件的现场查验。《洗冤集录》中对刑事案件现场勘查的描述较多。民事案件的现场查验，一般需要结合契约内容进行观察、测量，验证原被告口供的真实性。在证据的可采性审查方面，包括对言词证据的审查、对物证的审查和对书证的审查。对言词证据的审查方法包括五听、情理分析、验证等。宋代的官吏对五听作了进一步阐释，包括五听的先后主次，以及要注意甄别健讼者。情理分析多用于没有书证、物证等旁证支持时。对伤害类案件，在双方各执一词的情况下，可以通过验伤来评断原被告口供的真实性。物证的审查包括对物品和痕迹的审查。书证审查评断的方法包括笔迹检验、印章印文检验、朱墨时序检验、篡改文件检验和时间鉴定。第三章为宋代的证据证明。宋代证据证明的基本原则可概括为：以证据为基础的根勘情节裁判原则、情理约束下的自由心证原则和长吏躬亲审理原则。宋代的证据证明采用根勘情节的方法，情节既包括构成案件事实的客观要素，还包括根据已知行为推定出的未知行为和行为动机。宋代对这些情节采用证据证明和情理推定的方法进行根勘。根勘的基础是证据，所涉范围广泛，包括为追求实体真实即使是哑巴或精神病人的口供都可被采信。结案通常需要存在被告人的口供，线索也获得了证据地位。宋代的自由心证需要在情理约束之下，无论是对证据证明力的判断还是对案件事实的认定均需在情理约束之下。宋代断案官的这种自由心证约束在审理前、审理过程中、审理后均存在。宋代的长吏躬亲审理原则要求长吏直接审理，宋代统治者屡次下诏强调长吏要躬亲审理，对不能躬亲审理者要进行惩罚。宋代的长吏躬亲审理原则并非要求长吏全程参与，只要参加过即可。并且躬亲审理只适用于徒以上罪行。躬亲审理是狱讼实行长官负责制及防止案件假手胥吏的现实需要。影响宋代证据证明责任分配的原则是罪疑惟轻的裁判原则和审慎的有罪推定原则。在证据不足以形成心证的情况下，罪疑惟轻的裁判原则和审慎的有罪推定原则将举证不能的结果推给了被告。宋代在情理事实存疑时主要以赎法体现惟轻。为保证罪疑惟轻适用的适当性，官员有疑狱应上奏。审慎的有罪推定是指断案官在推定被告有罪时需有一定的内心确信基础。审慎既是条令的要求也是现实的需要，既防民诬告也防止“讼师”教唆。审慎的有罪推定免除了原告的举证责任，也加剧了被告的取证客体地位。宋代的证明对象可分为免证对象和待证事实。情理既包括人情，也包括由风俗习惯构成的不成文规则。情理可在断案中直接使用，甚至可以直接认定推知的情理事实。待证事实则包括案件本情和条制。由于宋代条令复杂，因此断案中需要审查条令出台的背景，条令的本意，条令的可行性等，并需要证据证明。第四章为宋代证据制度的成因探究。从宋代对其之前朝代证据制度的继承，宋代社会的发展，宋学的发达三方面进行研究。在宋以前朝代的证据制度方面，主要是之前朝代对被告人口供必要性、拷讯合法性及限制性等组成的讯问被告人制度，之前朝代在生活领域中对众多行为的文书记录所形成的书证制度及周代的“明德慎罚”、汉代“德主刑辅”、唐代“一准乎礼”等法律思想对证据证明的影响。宋代社会纸、墨、印刷技术的发达有利于文件普及，为百姓诉讼、普及书证、传播证据内容等提供了物质基础。宋代的鼓励垦荒、不抑兼并、土地自由买卖等政策促进田产类案件证据制度的完善。宋代出现了讼师秘本，并且讼学在一些地方得到规模发展，讼师参与诉讼等促进了证据制度的普及和完善。宋代的法医学得到了系统的总结，先后出过七部与法医学有关的著作，其中以《洗冤集录》最为详实、系统。宋代法医检验技术的提高与宋代几次重要的解剖活动都留下解剖图也有很大的关系。宋学为证据制度的发展提供了哲学基础。宋学在北宋主要由荆公新学主导，南宋由程朱理学主导。两者对证据的影响均是间接的、潜移默化的。荆公新学重视了法的重要性并付诸实践。熙丰改革提高了律令在科举取士中的地位，为宋提供了大量的懂法断案官，包括王安石在内的这些断案官在断案中更加重视证据的使用，尤其善于从公正角度运用证据。程朱理学强调三纲六纪在断案中的作用，在涉纲纪案件中对证据中蕴含的天理进行挖掘。程朱理学对断案官的影响表现在强调断案官的品行，进而在断案时懂得如何结合天理运用证据。更多还原

【Abstract】 Song’s evidence system was at an advanced stage in Chinese traditionalevidence system and had significant affect on the forming of evidence consciousnessand the use of evidence in later ages. Although many valuable academic achievementshave been made, currently few people systematically researches on Song’s evidencesystem.This situation leaves a relatively large space to the discussion in this article.This article is written based on an approach of empirical and comparative study. Theauthor cites a few precedents recorded in some books including Ming Gong Shu PanQing Ming Ji, Zhe Yu Gui Jian and Tang Yin Bi Shi as well as using ordinances incertain regulations including Song Xing Tong, Song Hui Yao Ji Gao and Qing YuanTiao Fa Shi Lei, and then systematically analyses Song’s evidence system.Besides the introduction and conclusion, the text of this article has four chaptersand the main points are presented as follows:The first chapter is about the developed classification of evidence in SongDynasty.The author divides the evidence into five categories: related person (knownas “Gan Lian Ren”) and confessions of defendant, material evidence, documentaryevidence and written inspection report. A related person included the plaintiff,witness and expert witness.The plaintiff, as a related person, could testify by means ofpleadings and confessions.The format, content, drafter and guarantor of the pleadingwere strictly regulated. The witness in Song Dynasty was in the position of beingtracked and could be interrogated by torture.The witnesses who were relatives of the contesting parties or in bad physical conditions could be released from testifying.Meanwhile, women did not have to testify in court in person. A special relatedperson was obligated to provide salvation if he/she was aware of the danger. Awitness who was irrelevant to a case was forbidden to file a lawsuit. The relatedperson in Song might also include experts who advised judges. The expert’stestimony had a strong probative force and could be accepted easily in hearing.In Song Dynasty, a defendant’s confession shared a significant important positionwhen deciding a case. From a perspective of probative force, the defendant’sconfession included making a clean breast of the truth upon arrest and voluntarilyconfess his/her crime. In order to get authentic and voluntary confessions from thedefendant, each interrogation must be recorded. Furthermore, when a case closed,all documents should be well filed.People in Song Dynasty had realized the importance of evidence’s objectivity inconviction and sentencing. Thus, people at that time laid much emphasis on materialso that a judge did not dare to end a case only by a defendant’s confession withoutany material evidence. There were various kinds of material evidence in SongDynasty Material evidence could be divided into materials, trace and human body.From the perspective of judicial practice, people in Song made the best use ofmaterial evidence.The biggest feature of documentary evidence in Song was that the form of somedocumentary evidence was strictly regulated. People were required to make writtencontract for important commercial activities, e.g., transactions of important capitalgoods, land leasing, government-owned real property leasing, deal in human beings,and employment. A standard agreement template was officially provided for landmortgage which regulated the content and form of the agreement.The written inspection report in Song Dynasty mainly referred to the bodyinspection report. As there was no injury inspection report, the injury inspectionresult was directly recorded into the files. Although there was classification ondisability, it was not included in the inspection and was only influential on convictionand sentencing. The postmortem examination in Song Dynasty included writteninspection sheet, inspection items and picture of human body’s front and back views.These three kinds of written inspections recorded details and procedures of the wholepostmortem examination and thus they elevated the probative force of written inspection.The second chapter is about the investigation of evidence in Song Dynasty.Such investigation included interrogation, search, interview, onsite inspection. Strictregulations were set on the interrogation of the defendant in Song Dynasty.Interrogation by torture could only be used under certain circumstances. To avoidcruel torture, specifications of torture instruments were strictly regulated. Thetorture instruments makers should sign on their products. Besides, restrictions weremade on the human part and number of times during interrogation. The judge inSong Dynasty put great importance on investigation skills to obtain the truth.Searching in Song Dynasty had public one after arrest and also private one. Probingwas always carried out at the city gates, gate guardians could examine some suspects.Investigations by visits had both legal and adjudicative ones, the legal one was usuallylinked to postmortem examination and the adjudicative one, public or private, was tofind insiders according to details of a case. On-the-spot inspections involved bothcriminal and civil cases. A book named Xi Yuan Ji Lu presents more descriptions ofon-the-spot inspections on criminal cases. As to the onsite inspection in civil cases,the defendant’s confessions could be verified based on investigation, measurementand the content of contract.The examination on admissibility of evidence included examination on oraltestimony, material evidence and documentary evidence. Examining oral testimonyincluded Wu Ting, analysis on fact and reasoning, and verification, etc. Officers inSong made further clarifications to Wu Ting, e.g., primary and secondary parts,screening vexatious parties. Analysis with reasons was applied when there was nodocumented or material evidence. In terms of injury cased, injury inspection couldbe taken to determine whether the confessions were authentic in case of argument.Ways to examine and judge the documentary evidences were handwritingidentification, on seals and stamps, sequence identification of crossed writings andseal stamps, identification on tampered documents and identification on time.The third chapter is about the use of evidence in Song. The basic principle ofevidence use can be summarized as fundamentally investigating a case based onevidence, discretional evaluation of evidence with limit by reason and the principleabout dealt with the case personally. The evidence was analyzed based on itsbackground. The background included objective factors about the fact of the case and the behavior unknown and motivation of the behavior to be inferred from thebehavior. In Song Dynasty the background would be analyzed by the methods ofevidence testimony and reason illation. As the base of analysis, the evidence had awide range because even the opinion from dummy and people with psychologicalproblems would be regarded as truth. In general, a case could not be closed withoutthe defendant’s confessions. Meanwhile, clues were also regarded as a kind ofevidence. In Song Dynasty, the discretional evaluation of evidence shall be limitedby reason at any time before, during and after the case. In Song Dynasty, the judgewas required to hear a case in person. The ruler stressed in writing several times onthis. Any judge who failed to do it personally will be punished. Actually thisprinciple didn’t require the judge to handle the case personally through the wholeprocess. Furthermore, it just applied to the crime above the level of TU (a kind ofpunishment). This principle was set up due to the reality that judge was responsiblefor the criminal cases and actually the case was directly handled by subordinate.The principle impacting the allocation of responsibility about evidence testimonywas the principle to judge the case by following the soft punishment when there wassomething doubt in the case and the principle to cautiously infer the guiltiness. Incase the evidences were not enough for the judgment, above two principles let thedefendant undertake the unfavorable consequences due to failure to submit evidences.In the Song Dynasty, in case something unclear in the fact or reason, and ensureproperly apply the principle, the case shall be reported if something was unclear.Cautiously guiltiness illation referred to the judge shall have confidence inside oncethe judge though the defendant was guilty. Cautious judgment was the need fromthe laws and also from the reality, and it could prevent the civilians from illegallyraising any cases and also prevent the officers from illegal behavior during dealingwith the case. Cautiously guiltiness illation exempted the plaintiff from burden ofevidence and increased the load of the defendant.In the Song Dynasty, the objective to be testified included something free ofbeing testified and something shall be testified. Reason included peoples’relationship and rules arising from customs. Reason could be used directly inhandling the case, even could be used to identify the facts inferred. Something to betestified included the fact of the case and the laws. Because the laws in the SongDynasty were complicated, the background of the laws, its meaning and its feasibilityshall be taken into consideration and need the evidence to testify it. The fourth chapter is about the reasons of evidence system in Song. In thischapter, the author discusses three issues-Song’s evidence system inheritance fromformer dynasties, Song’s social development, and prosperity of Song’s ideology(known as “Song Xue”). As to the former evidence systems, the author discussesthree major factors that effect the use of evidence in Song: i) the interrogation systemconsisting of the necessity of getting a defendant’s confessions, and the legality andrestriction of extorting confessions by torture; ii) the documentary evidence systemformed by the requirement of recording, in writing, various of activities in people’slife; and iii) the guiding thoughts of Ming De Shen Fa (Emphasizing on Virtue andBeing Cautious with Penalty) in Zhou Dynasty, De Zhu Xing Fu (Morality GivenPriority Over Penalty) in Han Dynasty, and Yi Zhun Yu Li (Discipline Rite Prevails)in Tang Dynasty.The technology development of papermaking, Chinese ink and printing in Songcontributed to the popularization of documentation. Furthermore, it also providedmaterial base to benefiting common people of filing lawsuits, popularizingdocumentary evidence and spreading information regarding evidence. Policies ofencouraging reclaiming wastelands, land annexation uninhibited and land free tradingin Song perfected the evidence system in land related cases. In addition, theLitigator Handbooks appeared in Song. The theory of litigation also well developedin some areas and litigators got involved in disputes. The above improved andpopularized Song’s evidence system. Song’s forensic medicine was alsosystematically summarized. Seven monographs relating to forensic medicine werepublished successively, of which Xi Yuan Ji Lu was the most detailed and systematicone. The improvement of forensic technologies had a lot to do with keeping atlas inseveral important anatomy events in Song.Song’s ideology provided philosophical foundation to the development ofevidence system. In the North Song Dynasty (or Earlier Song Dynasty (960-1127)),Song’s ideology was mainly guided by Jing Gong Xin Xue and in the South SongDynasty (1127-1279), it were mainly guided by Cheng Zhu Li Xue (a theory ofNeo-Confucianism). These two theories made an indirect and imperceptibleinfluence on Song’s evidence system. The Jing Gong Xin Xue paid attention to theimportance of law. Moreover, the implementation of Xi Feng Revolution heightenedthe status of laws and ordinances in imperial examinations, which provided a largenumber of judges with good legal knowledge. These judges, including Wang Anshi, paid more attention to use evidence in trials, especially from a perspective of justice.Cheng Zhu Li Xue emphasized on the role of San Gang Liu Ji (Three Cardinal Guidesand Six Disciplines) in trials. Hence, any case against these guides and disciplinescould be simply judged on the ground of against the heavenly principles-feudalethics as propounded by the Song Confucianists. The influence of Cheng Zhu LiXue on the judges can be seen on emphasizing on a judge’s good character, and inturn, using evidence with heavenly principles to judge a case.更多还原