本文關鍵詞： 龍筋鳳髓判 真實案件 唐律疏議　出處：《沈陽師范大學》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】：《龍筋鳳髓判》是中國古代一部著名的擬制判詞集。判詞是判決書的舊稱,也叫作斷語、結論,而擬制判詞是唐代備選官吏準備任職考試的練習之作。經霍存福教授《龍筋鳳髓判判目破譯:張澾判詞問目源自真實案例、奏章、實事考》一文考證,《龍筋鳳髓判》問目或為真實案例、奏章、實事改編而成。而黃源盛教授在《唐律與龍筋鳳髓判》一文中對霍存福教授的說法不甚贊同。本文內容之一即考證是否存在更多實例來佐證霍存福教授關于《龍筋鳳髓判》判目系真實案件的主張。鑒于《龍筋鳳髓判》作者為唐初張澾,筆者將《龍筋鳳髓判》的判目與唐初的正史、野史等相對照,在霍存福教授考證的真人、真事的基礎上,找出了多個與史料相契合的人和事。筆者認為,《龍筋鳳髓判》雖為擬判,但其判目卻源自真實案件、公事、奏議等,而其判詞則是張澾運用律令、禮法、情理等進行的個人創(chuàng)作。本文以《唐律疏議》、《唐令拾遺》等法律規(guī)定為大前提,以霍存福教授考證及本文增補、校正的《龍筋鳳髓判》的真人、真事為小前提,分析張澾斷案的法律依據(jù)及案件推理。本文主要分三章進行論述。第一章,分析《龍筋鳳髓判》作者張澾的生平、該書的成書情況及其判目與唐初真實案件的淵源關系。第二章,逐個闡釋已考證的張澾判詞問目的來源及理由,并結合唐初律令進行案件分析,以體現(xiàn)張澾對律令的嫻熟運用。第三章,將未考證出來源的張澾判詞問目與相似度高的唐初案件進行對比分析,以后者佐證張澾斷案的合于法理、順乎人情。
[Abstract]:The judgment of Longjin Fengsui is a famous fictitious judgment set in ancient China. The judgment is the old name of the judgment, also known as the sentence, conclusion. And the fictitious judgment is the Tang Dynasty candidate officials to prepare for the practice of the post examination. By Professor Huo Cunfu < long Jin Feng marrow judgment to decipher: Zhang Yu judgment asked the eyes from the real case, playing the seal, the examination of the actual matter "a textual research." "Longjin Fengpiu judgment" question or for the real case, playing the seal. But Professor Huang Yuan-sheng did not agree with Professor Fok Cunfu in Tang Law and the judgment of Longjin Feng Pulp. One of the contents of this paper is to find out whether there are more examples to support Professor Fok Cunfu's theory of "Dragon". In view of the author of "Longjin Fengpiu judgment", the author is Zhang Yu in the early Tang Dynasty. The author contrasts the judgment of "Longjin Fengsui judgment" with the official history and the wild history in the early Tang Dynasty. On the basis of the real person and the real thing verified by Professor Huo Cunfu, the author finds out a number of people and things that agree with the historical data. Although Longjin Fengpiu judgment is intended to be decided, its judgment is derived from real cases, official business, and performance, etc. The judgment is based on Zhang's personal creation with the use of decrees, etiquette, and reason. In this article, the author uses "Tang Ruoshou". "Tang Ling" and other legal provisions as the major premise, with Professor Fok Cunfu textual research and this article, the correction of the "long Jin Feng Pulp judgment" real people, the real thing is a small premise. This paper is mainly divided into three chapters to discuss. The first chapter is to analyze the author's life. The second chapter explains the origin and reason of Zhang Yu's judgment on the purpose and reason of the textual research, and analyzes the case in combination with the law and order of the early Tang Dynasty. In order to reflect Zhang's skillful application of the law. Chapter three, the author contrasts Zhang's judgment with the case of the early Tang Dynasty, which has high similarity, which proves the conformity of the legal principle of Zhang's case.
【學位授予單位】：沈陽師范大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D929

【相似文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 徐燕斌;;穿行在禮與法之間——《龍筋鳳髓判》所揭示的唐代官吏的司法觀[J];昆明理工大學學報(社會科學版);2008年03期

2 ;龍筋鳳髓判(譯注)[J];南京大學法律評論;1996年02期

3 巫芳蘭;;淺論唐代的禮儀犯罪——以《龍筋鳳髓判》為例[J];綏化學院學報;2010年02期

4 木子;;《龍筋鳳髓判》即將整理出版[J];法律文獻信息與研究;1995年01期

5 賈俊俠,張艷云;《龍筋鳳髓判》探析[J];西安文理學院學報(社會科學版);2005年04期

6 夏婷婷;;論《龍筋鳳髓判》中對案件事實的推理方法[J];當代法學;2011年01期

7 夏婷婷;霍存福;;論唐代張澾判案擇律的方法與技巧——以《龍筋鳳髓判》為研究中心[J];求索;2013年05期

8 李威;;論古代司法判例的作用及其對當代中國的啟示——基于《龍筋鳳髓判》的解析[J];法制與社會;2013年10期

9 李世進;;從《龍筋鳳髓判》看唐朝初期邊防問題[J];科教文匯(中旬刊);2013年09期

10 郭成偉;;唐律與《龍筋鳳髓判》體現(xiàn)的中國傳統(tǒng)法律語言特色[J];法學家;2006年05期

相關重要報紙文章 前1條

1 武警8691部隊 鄭傳剛;善治者無赫赫之功[N];解放軍報;2011年

相關碩士學位論文 前4條

1 徐銘澤;《龍筋鳳髓判》真實案件研究[D];沈陽師范大學;2017年

2 劉娜;《龍筋鳳髓判》研究[D];四川師范大學;2011年

3 潘峰;《龍筋鳳髓判》律文探析[D];吉林大學;2007年

4 周揚志;張澾及其《龍筋鳳髓判》文學研究[D];廣西師范大學;2011年

，

本文編號：1468297