財產何必「神聖」？──清代「盜官物」律例論解

Property has No Need to Be Sacred: A Study of Stealing 'Guan Wu' in Qing Dynasty

當代的「國家財產」類似於清代的「官物」，當代法律對國家財產的保護不同於對私人財產，清代律例亦對侵犯官物與私物的行為處以不同的刑罰。整體而言，清律體現出「律重官物」與「嚴監守寬常人」兩大原則，並對盜特殊官物行為有特殊的處理方式，而「雜犯」等規則的摻入使得「律重官物」原則發生動搖。當代法律從原初立法目的而言，亦有類似清律的這兩大原則，但新近出台的司法解釋突破了「嚴監守寬常人」的原則。國家財產不必比私人財產更「神聖」，無論國家還是私人財產都不必「神聖」，在官之人或國家工作人員對其所監守之財物的盜行為理應比常人的普通盜行為罪責重大，故清律與今法對上述兩大原則不同角度的改變使得當今相關制度尚不如清代。當然，清律也並非完美無缺，但無論得失，其在立法意旨、立法技術等方面的經驗教訓均深值如今的借鑒與反思。

The concept of state property nowadays is similar to Guan Wu(Official Objects) in traditional times. Law in both modern times and QingDynasty distinguish private property from state property/Guan Wu.Generally speaking, there were two principles in the Great Qing Code:focus on Guan Wu; punishing inside job severely. Besides, the Code had special rules to treat special Guan Wu and Za Fan. There are similar principles in Criminal Law nowadays, but the latest judicial interpretation has made things different. State property/Guan Wu has no need to be more sacred than private property, and all kinds of property has no need to be sacred. Inside job is more serious than ordinary theft. The Great Qing Code is imperfect, but it could provide reference for nowadays.