清律「原毆傷輕，因風身死」例的成立與變化

A Discussion of the Establishmentand Variation of the Legal Case “the minor wound in the original assault leading to death from tetanus”in the Great Qing Legal

鬥毆律「保辜限期」自唐律已臻完備並為歷朝沿用，但是有別於前朝，明律增添「責令犯人醫治」的規定而清律又加入「保，養也」的說明，使保辜的解釋從原本針對犯人的「保其罪」，延伸出以醫療「保養」被害人傷勢的新意。此外，清律「保辜限期」的重要變化，在於「原毆傷輕，因風身死」條例的出現與修訂，不僅改變長久以來歷朝將「頭瘡得風」排除在「他故」之外的作法，同時使地方官與刑部審視案件時，注意兩造尋求醫療的後續情況，以辨別責任歸屬並審判犯人的罪刑。對此，本文首先整理相關條例從康熙到嘉慶年間的成立過程與修訂內容；其次從鬥毆因風身死案分析「原毆傷輕，因風身死」例在地方上實際運用的情況，從中可觀察到幾個現象：一是地方官與刑部對於該條例適用上時有辯論，反映地方官在重大刑案的審判過程中，並非全然必須服從刑部的指示。二是地方官需要了解被害人的死因，才能進一步審度犯人的量刑，因此除了仵作的檢驗外，醫者的供述成為支持地方官依「原毆傷輕，因風身死」例審擬案件的重要佐證。

The “period of victim protection” of the brawl law was well established in the Tang Dynasty and used by succeeding dynasties. Unlike former dynasties, the Ming Dynasty added the provision of “the convicted should be responsible for the medical treatment of the victim”. In addition, the major change of the “period of victim protection” in Great Qing Legal Codelies in the emergence and amendment of the provision of “the minor wound in the original assault leading to death from tetanus.” The provision divertedthe practices of excluding “head injury complication” from “other causes” by former dynasties,making subsequent medical care sought by both parties to be supervised,judged,and sentencedby local and central juridical authorities. This article first collates the relevant provisions, the process of their establishment, and the content of their amendments during the period from Kangxi to Jiaqing in the Qing Dynasty. Then it will analyze actual applications of the provision of “the minor wound in the original assault leading to death from tetanus” in local cases, so as to observe several phenomena.Firstly, local officials often argued with the Board of Punishment over the application of the provision, reflectingthe fact that the local officials did not completely follow the instructions of the Board of Punishment in the trial of major criminal cases.Secondly, the local officials needed to understand the cause of death of the victim in order to assess the sentencing of the prisoner, so a medical doctor's statement served as an important evidence to support them in reviewing the case based onthe provision of “the minor wound in the original assault leading to death from tetanus. ” .