【作者】 王敏；

【导师】 武飞；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 法学理论， 2021， 硕士

【摘要】 我国在传统司法过程中就十分重视情理的运用,“缘情断狱”是我国传统司法的重要特点。在现代司法中,主张“以事实为依据,以法律为准绳”,但这并不意味着情理在司法裁判中没有任何运用的空间和可能性了。尤其是近些年引起大家广泛关注的案件,比如许霆案、于欢案等都恰恰说明了在当今司法裁判中情理运用的重要性。情理在司法实践中的运用能够以看得见的方式体现出来的就是在裁判文书中情理的运用。对此,《最高人民法院关于加强和规范裁判文书释法说理的指导意见》还做出了专门的要求。因此,必须重视情理在裁判文书中的运用并对其运用进行充分的论证,充分发挥其作用,提高裁判结果的正当性和可接受性,使双方当事人从内心深处认可和理解裁判结果,以真正实现定纷止争。但是在目前的司法实践中,法官在裁判文书中运用情理时仍然存在诸多的问题,比如“情”“理”的指向范围不明晰,听众目标定位不精准,导致法官说理缺乏针对性,影响双方当事人对于裁判结果的认可和接受程度;论证标准不清晰,修辞文法使用水平差异大,导致裁判文书质量参差不齐,情理运用的效果也大相径庭。这些问题都是在今后的裁判文书中情理运用的论证过程中应当注意和避免的。当然,本文的重点是针对如何实现裁判文书中情理运用的论证提出相关建议,为此,可以对我国传统司法中的情理运用和现代司法中运用情理进行说理论证的典型案例进行研究、分析,学习、借鉴其中的先进经验,为我所用。情理的运用是必要和重要的,但也正如许多反对者所质疑的那样,情理运用确实存在一定的主观性,因此必须对其运用进行严格的限制,其运用必须限制在一定的条件和场景之下。首先,情理运用的案件类型必须是家事等民事案件以及社会情理期待程度较高的刑事案件;其次,情理运用的规范前提必须是法律规范及裁判结果存在一定的不确定性,在那些有明确的法律规范可以适用而且适用法律规范得出的裁判结果也是合情合理的案件中要严格依照法律进行裁判;再次,情理运用对于法官的个人能力有较高的要求,要求法官必须具备相应的社会经验和修辞能力,保证法官能够准确运用情理,并能够运用修辞对情理运用进行充分论证,提高裁判结果的说服力;最后,要保证法律规范与情理修辞具有融贯性。同时,情理的运用必须遵循一定限度,防止滥用。首先,情理的运用应当以必要为前提,非必要不滥用;其次,情理指向的内容不能与证据裁判原则相违背,不能像彭宇案中一样无视证据裁判原则运用情理进行裁判;再次,要保证修辞论证的文法简洁有效,不进行过度渲染,不适用不恰当的修辞手法进行论证;最后,裁判结论应当与法律体系实现规范融贯。更多还原

【Abstract】 Our country attaches great importance to the application of reason in the traditional judicial process,"the reason of emotion is freed from prison" is an important characteristic of our country’s traditional judicature.In modern judicature,it advocates "taking facts as the basis and the law as the criterion",but this does not mean that there is no possibility for the use of reason in judicial adjudication.In particular,the cases that have attracted wide attention in recent years,such as the case of Xu Ting and the case of Yu Huan,all illustrate the importance of the application of reason in today’s judicial adjudication.The use of reason in judicial practice can be reflected in a visible way is the use of reason in the judgment documents.Therefore,it is necessary to attach importance to the application of reason in the judgment documents and fully demonstrate its application,to improve the legitimacy and acceptability of the judgment results,and make both parties recognize and understand the judgment results from the depths of their hearts,so as to truly achieve the settlement of disputes.However,there are still many problems in the application of reason in judgment documents.For example,the pointing range of "sentiment"and "sense" is not clear,and the target positioning of the audience is not accurate,which leads to the lack of pertinence of the judge’s reasoning and affects the recognition and acceptance of the judgment results by both parties.The standard of argumentation is not clear,the level of rhetoric and grammar use is different.We should pay attention to and avoid to these problems.The focus of this paper is to put forward relevant suggestions on how to realize the demonstration of reasonable application in judgment documents.Therefore,we can analyze the typical cases of the use of reason and reasoning in the traditional judicature and modern judicature,and draw on the advanced experience for our use.The use of reason is necessary and important,but just as many opponents questioned,the use of reason does have a certain degree of subjectivity.So it must be strictly restricted to its use and its use must be limited under certain conditions and scenarios.First of all,the case type of reasonable use must be civil cases such as family affairs and criminal cases with high degree of social reasonable expectation.Secondly,the standard premise of reasonable application must be the uncertainty of legal norms and judgment results.In those cases where there are clear legal norms can be applied and the judgment results obtained by the application of legal norms are reasonable,the judgment should be conducted strictly in accordance with the law.Thirdly,the application of reason has higher requirements for the personal ability of the judge,which requires the judge to have corresponding social experience and rhetorical ability to ensure that the judge can accurately use reason,and can use rhetoric to fully demonstrate the application of reason,and improve the persuasion of the judgment result.Finally,it is necessary to ensure the consistency between legal norms and reasonable rhetoric.At the same time,the use of reason must follow a certain limit to prevent abuse.First of all,the use of reason should be necessary as the premise.Secondly,the content pointing to the reason should not violate the principle of evidence judgment,and it should not disregard the principle of evidence judgment and use the reason to make a judgment as in the case of Peng Yu.Thirdly,it is necessary to ensure that the grammar of rhetorical argument is concise and effective,and not to over-exaggerate and not to apply inappropriate rhetorical devices for argumentation.Finally,the judgment conclusion should be standardized and integrated with the legal system.更多还原