从依据到理由——迈向一种实质性的同案同判观  

From Basis to Reasons:Towards A Substantive Conception of “Treating Like Cases Alike”

作　　者：朱振 Zhu Zhen(Law School,Jilin University,Changchun 130012)

机构地区：[1]吉林大学理论法学研究中心 [2]吉林大学法学院,长春130012

出　　处：《浙江社会科学》2022年第4期36-44,69,157,共11页Zhejiang Social Sciences

基　　金：国家社会科学基金青年项目“法官决策模型及其影响因子研究”中期研究成果(项目编号16CFX001)。

摘　　要：作为司法活动的一项基本要求,同案同判有着两种不同的理解方式:一是作为司法政策的同案同判;二是作为推理方式的同案同判。后一种具有概念上的独立价值,而不是仅成为司法政策的一种通俗表述。指导性案例在司法体制中的定位,既表明参照指导性案例是一项法律义务,又表明参照的内容可以是前案说理中体现的抽象法律理由。指导性案例本身的复杂性也提供了对同案同判原则进行更为抽象化理论建构的可能性,即从作为理由之治的司法裁判过程出发,实质性理由既是判断类案的依据,也构成待决案件裁判的核心理由。实质性的同案同判观不仅具有坚实的理论基础,能深化我们对平等原则的理解,而且在实践上也有助于引导指导性案例的更广泛的运用。As a basic requirement of judicial activities,“treating like cases alike” has two different ways of understanding:one is “treating like cases alike” as a judicial policy;The second is “treating like cases alike” as a way of reasoning.The latter has independent conceptual value and will not only become a popular expression of judicial policy.The orientation of guiding cases in the judicial system not only shows that referring to guiding cases is a legal obligation;It also shows that the content of reference may be the abstract legal reasons embodied in the reasoning of the previous cases.The complexity of the guiding case itself provides the possibility of more abstract theoretical construction of the principle of “treating like cases alike”,that is,starting from the judicial judgment process as the rule of reasons,the substantive reasons are not only the basis for judging similar cases,but also the core reasons for the judgment of pending cases.The substantive concept of “treating like cases alike” not only has a solid theoretical foundation and deepens our understanding of the principle of equality,but also helps to guide the wider use of guiding cases in practice.

关 键 词：同案同判 平等 理由 

分 类 号：D926.2[政治法律—法学]