조선시대의 민사소송 제도에 대한 현대적 평가
A Modern Approach to Civil Procedure of the Chosun Dynasty
이종구(단국대학교)
39권 4호, 3~29쪽
초록
본고는 조선시대의 민사소송 구조를 살펴보면서 대법원의 상고법원 설치안에 관하여 첨언하였다. 민사소송제도는 법원이 사적인 권리의무에 관한 분쟁을 확정하여 사회질서를 유지하기 위한 것이다. 조선시대에 소송의 범람은 유교적 공동체의 질서를 저해하는 것으로 예치(禮治)가 실현되는 이상사회와는거리가 먼 것이었다. 그러나 조선시대 전반에 걸쳐 사권의식의 확장과 더불어소송이 범람하였고, 조선은 소송을 줄이기 위하여 다양한 정책들을 채택하였다. 가령 조선은 단송(斷訟)을 위한 타협책으로 과한법(過限法)을 제정하여 출소기간을 제한하고, 삼도득신법(三度得伸法)에 의하여 판결의 확정력 또는 기판력을 강화하고, 또한 소송지연을 막기 위하여 친착법(親着法) 등을 채택하였다. 또한 민사재판은 쌍방심리주의, 당사자처분권주의, 변론주의 및 증거재판주의에 입각하여 진행되어 오늘날의 민사재판과 크게 다르지 않았다. 그러나조선시대 민사재판은 독립성이 보장된 법률전문가가 아니라 고을 수령인 행정관이 재판을 진행함으로써 재판의 공정성이나 판결의 신뢰성이 충분하게 확보되지 못하였다. 따라서 조선시대 전반에 걸쳐 단송을 위하여 채택된 여러 정책들에도 불구하고 소송의 범람과 남소는 위정자들에게 상당한 부담으로 작용하였다. 이러한 현상은 오늘날에도 다르지 않다. 법원은 민사소송의 범람으로 과도한 업무에 시달리고 있고, 대법원은 상고사건의 폭주로 인하여 최고법원으로서의 권위를 잃어가고 있다. 따라서 대법원은 재판업무의 과중을 해결하기 위하여 최근에 상고법원 설치를 제안한 바 있다. 그러나 하급심 판결이 대법원의 판결 못지않은 신뢰와 권위를 갖춘다면 상고사건은 자연스럽게 줄어들 것이다. 따라서 대법원이 현재 추진하고 있는 하급심의 강화가 어느 정도 정착되고, 하급심의 판결에 대한 국민들의 신뢰가 확보되어 가는 것을 보면서 상고법원 설치의 필요성을 검토하는 것이 바람직할 것으로 생각한다.
Abstract
The law of civil procedure prescribes the methods by which individuals may enforce their substantive laws by civil lawsuits. Korea introduced modern civil procedures, based on French and German models in Kobo Reform of 1894. Korea was the monarch, called Chosun Dynasty, from 1392 to 1910. Chosun adopted Confucianism as a state ideology. Confucianism was a body of philosophical and ethical-sociopolitical teachings. One of the teachings of Confucius was the proper rite(Ye, 禮), which means a moral norm. Confucians insisted that governments do not rely on penal punishment, but place more emphasis on a moral norm when they govern their people. According to Confucianism, Chosun tried to realize a moral and peaceful society. During Chosun dynasty, the inundation of civil lawsuits was very problematic because it hindered the achievement of a rational-moral society. Therefore, Chosun developed and adopted many kinds of judicial policy to cut back civil litigations expediently. For instances, it limited the period of time for bringing a civil case in court. According to the Statute of Gwahan, which is similar to a statute of limitation, the maximum time was 5 years. Chosun adopted Samdoddeuksin rule, which means a principle of a three-instance trial process. Under the rule, claims can be filed three time to a lower court and a higher court. If a party win two times in the lawsuit, he or she becomes a final winner. In addition, even though a party was summoned by a service by judge’s order, if a party does not appear on the date for oral arguments, the party loses the case. This was called Chinchak, which is similar to today’s constructive admission. In addition, Chosun adopted an adversary system and a principle of trial by evidence to secure the trial fairness and justice. As a result, the suit began with the parties presenting their claims, and the parties themselves was responsible for gathering and presenting evidence and arguments on behalf of their positions. Judge merely listened to both sides and then rendered a decision. Accordingly, judges played the relatively passive role of umpire. However, despite the effort of Chosun government, these procedural rules were not perfectly followed by judges and parties. In particularly, the Executive and the Judiciary was not separated, and judicial power was exercised by administrative officials, not legal experts. They sometimes abused their judicial power, and therefore parties did not often trust the judicial process. Therefore, during Chosun dynasty, courts have been inundated with civil lawsuits. However, it is remarkable that Chosun government adopted a statute of limitation, a three-instance trial process, an adversary system, and a principle of trial by evidence to handle civil cases fairly and expeditiously.
- 발행기관:
- 법학연구소
- 분류:
- 법학