相同的案件获得相同的判决结果，这是司法正义的核心要素。“法律面前人 人平等”是现代法治国家公认的基本原则，而法律适用上的平等是这一原则在司 法领域的具体体现。法律适用平等，必然追求法律适用机制和适用效果的统一。 改革开放以来我国社会转型，经济生活急剧变迁，各类矛盾和纠纷日益增多， 法院受理的案件逐年增加。与此同时，“同案不同判”现象在不同层级法院、不 同地区甚至同一个法院的不同庭室，甚或在很短的时间段里相同庭室的不同法官 之间还比较普遍的存在。这种现象在一定程度上灼伤了人民大众的法治激情。纵 然我国普遍存在的“同案不同判”现象之原因是多方面的，但我国是以制定法为 主要法律渊源的国家，而制定法在适用过程中的固有缺陷却是“同案不同判”现 象附身的幽魂。因为制定法本身固有的局限性，法律原则的高度概括性，司法解 释的制定法特性，它们面对普遍存在的“同案不同判”现象均无能为力。客观现 实迫切地需要一种新的司法制度。最高人民法院发布的《人民法院第二个五年改 革纲要（2004-2008）》明确提出建立和完善案例指导制度，案例指导制度正是应 这种客观需要而生成。二十多年来最高法院发布公报的实践和近年来地方法院对 “判例制度”的探索为案例指导制度提供了契机和现实资源积累。可以说，案例 指导制度是我国“判例”传统的复兴与超越，更确切地说，它是我国制定法传统 背景下实现法律统一适用客观规律的深刻发现和揭示。只有运用指导性案例的灵 活性来中和制定法的刚性，我们的司法统一之道才有归途。一言蔽之，在我国特 定司法场域中，案例指导制度不仅是可行的，而且是必须的。 关键词，案例指导制度；指导性案例；法律统一适用；判例II Abstract Indentical law case gains indentical court decision result, which is the core element of justice. “All people are equal before the law” is an universally accepted basic principle in the modern judicial country, and the equality of law-applying is concrete manifestation in the judicial field. It must pursue unification of legal mechanism and applicable effect. Our country society transformes, the economic life changes rapidly since the reform and openness, various contradictions and disputes increase gradually, the cases accepted by the courts increase year by year. Meanwhile, the phenomenon of the same case with different judgment is universal existence in the courts at different levels, different area ,even the different court room of the same court, or even between different judges of the same court room in a very short time. It has hurt the intense judicial passion of masses of people in certain degree. Although, the reasons for the universal phenomenon of the same case with different judgment are various, the statute law is the main origin of the law in our country, its inherent defect in the course of application is attached to the phenomenon which the same case has different judgment as if ghost. Because of the inherent limitation of the statute law and generalized highly of law principle and judicial explanation of property of statuary law, they are powerless. Objective reality urgent need one kind of new of judicial system .The Supreme People's Court issued the People's Court outline for the reform of the second five-year (2004-2008),which explicitly pointed out the establishment and perfection of the case guiding system, the case guiding system is just the objective need of this generation. The practice of the Supreme Court issued communiques for more than 20 years and exploration of the District Court tried Case system in recent years have provided opportunities and resources of accumulated reality. So we can say it is rehabilitation and excess of China's Case tradition, It, more precisely, is the profound discovery and revelation realizing the objective rule of uniform law-applying on China's traditional legal background. It is using the flexibility of the case directing system neutralizes the rigidity of the statute law that the road of our judicial unification will find its way. In a word, the case guiding system is necessary as well as feasible in the special judicial field of our country. Key words: the case guiding system; the guiding cases; the unification of law-applying ; legal precedentIII 目 录 第 1 章 导 论 .............................................................................................................1 1.1 选题背景及意义 ................................................................................................1 1.2 文献综述 ...........................................................................................................2 1.3 研究的内容和方法 ............................................................................................6 1.4 研究的目的及创新 ............................................................................................7 第 2 章 问题的提出....................................................................................................9 2.1 同案不同判—我国司法实践的困惑 ..................................................................9 2.1.1 法律规定明确，同案奈何不同判 ...............................................................9 2.1.2 法律规定不明确，同案依旧不同判 .........................................................10 2.1.3 法律无明文规定，同案坦然不同判 .........................................................10 2.2 司法窘境呼唤案例指导制度 ...........................................................................12 第 3 章 案例指导制度的法理涵义...........................................................................15 3.1 案例指导制度的内涵.......................................................................................15 3.1.1 指导性案例的含义 ....................................................................................15 3.1.2 案例指导制度的界定 .................................................................................17 3.2 案例指导制度的价值意义 ..............................................................................19 3.2.1 接近司法正义，凸显“同案同判” .........................................................20 3.2.2 彰显司法理性，寻求制度设计的“刚柔并济” ......................................21 3.2.3 整合司法资源，“权威”与“效率”并重................................................22 第 4 章 案例指导制度的可行性分析 .......................................................................24 4.1 传统“判例”现象的复兴与超越 ...................................................................24 4.1.1 中国古代“判例制度” ............................................................................24 4.1.2 近代“判例”在中国 .................................................................................27 4.1.3 “判例”在我国现代的样态 .....................................................................27 4.2 司法实践----案例指导制度的现实资源积累 ..................................................29 4.2.1《公报》发布案例，案例指导制度的契机................................................29 4.2.2 地方法院的实践，案例指导制度的现实资源 ..........................................33 4.3 域外法律统一适用的经验与反思 ...................................................................36 4.3.1 英美法律统一适用的保障---判例法传统 ..................................................36 4.3.2 欧陆法律统一适用的智慧—-判例补充 .....................................................37IV 4.4 案例指导制度，法律统一适用的中国话语 ....................................................39 4.4.1 制定法的刚性需要案例补充 .....................................................................40 4.4.2 法律原则的抽象性也需要案例补充 .........................................................43 4.4.3 司法解释的制定法特性仍需要案例补充..................................................44 第 5 章 案例指导制度建立与运行的困难及对策....................................................49 5.1 案例指导制度建立与运行的困难及对策分析 ................................................49 5.1.1 观念意识的障碍，制定法万能 .................................................................49 5.1.2 政治制度的障碍，立法权对司法权的控制 ..............................................50 5.1.3 司法体制的障碍，司法弱势 .....................................................................51 5.1.4