English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 49258/83791 (59%)
Visitors : 7141789      Online Users : 48
RC Version 7.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library & TKU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://tkuir.lib.tku.edu.tw:8080/dspace/handle/987654321/87779


    Title: 宋代人力女使與雇主間之法律關係
    Other Titles: The legal relationship between employees and employers in Sung dynasty
    Authors: 曾斌涵;Tseng, Bin-Hang
    Contributors: 淡江大學歷史學系碩士班
    黃繁光;Hwang, Farn-Guang
    Keywords: 法律關係;刑罰;權利;身分;血緣;人力女使;right;Punishment;law;The status;Employees
    Date: 2012
    Issue Date: 2013-04-13 11:44:40 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 本文之問題核心是討論宋代人力、女使與雇主的法律關係,「法律關係」是一個複雜且難以清楚表達之概念,故本文從兩個層面切入探討,一為宋代人力、女使的身分,在「罪與罰」方面,有何種變化,及法令變化背後所蘊含之意義,「雇傭制」對於傳統主僕相犯之法律量刑原則是否有所影響。
      另一則為「身分」與權利,人力、女使之身分在民事權利上給予哪些權利。本文以「財產權」為討論焦點,探討他們如何維護己產,及女使對親生子女財產之享有哪些權利,權利之來源為何,以及其與妻妾在相同權利上之比較。
      在殺、毆、姦三罪中,透過法典律文比對、實際案例觀察、以及時人態度之演變,可以發現人力、女使與過往賤口奴婢犯主時,其量刑是出現差異。人力、女使不再被視為主人資財,「良賤之別」不構成其犯罪量刑之依據,「主僕差距」成為其刑責之主要考量,並隨著主人「身分」有所不同。
      人力、女使在維護己產時,法官看重的是具有法律效力之文件,不因為其「身分」剝奪她的權利。為主生子之女使,其親生子女繼承亡主遺產,女使可因著「血緣」之緣故,對子女財產享有保管、教令權。
      可以發現,宋代「人力、女使」與主人間之法律關係,在「刑罰」各罪上,他們不再處於絕對劣勢,法律了保障他們的生命權,主人不再視其為資財,不得隨意擅殺,具有「人」的性質。在「權利」方面,「身分」不會影響其對己產之權利,司法者所注重的是具有法律效力之文件。有子之女使在宣稱其對親生子女財產之權利時,法官不因為她是「女使」之身分,而剝奪其應有的權利,「血緣」關係之確立,反而成為立法、執法者考量的重點,使得她們享有若干權利。
    The core of problem is the legal relationship between employees and employers in Sung dynasty. It’s a complex question, and difficult to clearly expressing. So this article explores two perspectives: “punishment” and “right”.
    In punishment, employees are better than slaves. They didn’t regard as host’s property. Host can’t arbitrary kill their employees. If they did, they would suffer severe sanctions.
    In right, employees may have their property. If someone tries to trespass it, they could claim the right of their fortune by legal means. In other hands, the status didn’t affect their right. The other question is female employees have some rights for their own children’s property. In this question, we can know the judge valued the Kinship better than the status.
    We can know that the legal relationship between employees and employers in Sung dynasty was different from Tang dynasty. Employees were not at an absolute disadvantage in punishment, legal protection their right to life. “Status” didn’t affect the right to own property.
    Appears in Collections:[歷史學系暨研究所] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    index.html0KbHTML157View/Open

    All items in 機構典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library & TKU Library IR teams. Copyright ©   - Feedback