|
裁判文书认定表情包具有法律效力的技术路线再思考——基于864篇裁判文书的分析
|
Abstract:
在当代中国的司法裁判文书中,存在不少引用表情包的现象,且随时代发展仍与日俱增。通过中国裁判文书网检索到864篇文书,总结民事、刑事、行政三大类裁判文书引用表情包的方式,提炼出其三大价值:明确争议焦点、辅助查明案件事实、作为裁判依据或者证据,系统剖析研究裁判文书中表情包的方式与价值,并尝试提出裁判文书认定表情包法律效力的限度,以期能为裁判文书认定表情包具有法律效力的技术路线做出些许探索。
In the judicial judgment documents of contemporary China, there are many phenomena of citing expression pack, and they are still increasing with the development of the times. By retrieving 864 documents through the China Judgment Online, this paper summarizes the ways in which the expression pack is cited in the civil, criminal and administrative judgment documents, and extracts its three major values: clarifying the focus of controversy, assisting in identifying the facts of the case, and serving as the basis or evidence for the judgment. This paper systematically analyzes the juris-prudence of the expression pack in the judgment documents, and tries to put forward the limits of the legal effect of the expression pack in the judgment documents, in order to make some explorations for improving the research and standardization of the expression package in the field of judicial judgment.
[1] | 赵贺. 做好裁判文书释法说理增强司法裁判公信力[N/OL]. 人民法院报, 2022-06-16.
http://rmfyb.chinacourt.org/paper/html/2022-06/16/content_217977.htm?div=-1, 2022-08-11. |
[2] | 《法理学》编写组. 法理学[M]. 第2版. 北京: 人民出版社, 高等教育出版社, 2020: 129. |
[3] | 孙国华, 朱景文. 法理学[M]. 第4版. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2020: 152. |
[4] | 刘树德. “裁判依据”与“裁判理由”的法理之辨及其实践样态——以裁判效力为中心的考察[J]. 法治现代化研究, 2020, 4(3): 123-138. |
[5] | 夏立款. 网络表情符号证据化的机理及路径[J]. 人民论坛, 2022(9): 93-95. |
[6] | 彭兰. 表情包: 密码、标签与面具[J]. 西安交通大学学报(社会科学版), 2019, 39(1): 104-110+153. |
[7] | 谢进杰, 邓慧筠. 刑事裁判说理中的“常理” [J]. 中山大学学报(社会科学版), 2019, 59(3): 146-162. |
[8] | 光明网. 法院提醒: 这些表情不能随意发[EB/OL]. 2022-06-28.
https://m.gmw.cn/baijia/2022-06/28/1303018206.html, 2022-09-03. |
[9] | 屈济荣, 李异平. 作为“图像行为”的表情包: 符号、修辞与话语[J]. 编辑之友, 2018(10): 45-50. |