The Litigation Guidance of the Provincial governor in Civil lawsuit (詞訟) during the Joseon Dynasty -Focusing on 「The Uiryeonghyeon Gyeolgeupiban(宜寧縣決給立案) of 1635」-

This paper examines how the Provincial governor’s litigation guidance was carried out in civil lawsuit(詞訟) during the Joseon Dynasty, focusing on 『The Uiryeonghyeon Gyeolgeupiban of 1635』. A characteristic of pre-modern litigation is the discrepancy between ‘prescribed law’ and ‘practiced law.’ While the 『Gyeolsongipansik (決訟立案式)』 in Gyeongguk Daejeon (經國大典) or Yuseopilji (儒胥必知) represents the ‘prescribed law,’ the Gyeolsongiban (決訟立案) existing in the form of old documents represents the ‘practiced law.’ The litigation procedures in Gyeongguk Daejeon or Yuseopilji stipulated that the Songgwan(訟官), the local magistrate, initiated, heard, and judged lawsuits independently without the guidance of the Provincial governor, and this type of litigation is referred to as ‘Jari (自理)-Jadan (自斷)’ type in this paper. This ‘Jari (自理)-Jadan (自斷)’ type, where the local magistrate (守令) independently proceeds through all stages of the litigation process, including the initiation, hearing, and judgement, is similar to today’s civil litigation procedures.<br/> Meanwhile, among the Gyeolsongiban existing in the form of old documents, there are not only ‘Jari (自理)-Jadan (自斷)’ types but also instances where the Provincial governor guided the entire litigation process. This type of litigation is referred to as the ‘Sangsin (上申)-Jihwi (指揮)’ type Gyeolsongiban in this paper. This ‘Sangsin (上申)-Jihwi (指揮)’ type, where the Provincial governor guides the entire litigation process, is a unique litigation procedure of the Joseon Dynasty that does not exist today.<br/> The Uiryeonghyeon Gyeolgeupiban discussed in this paper is a ‘Sangsin (上申)-Jihwi (指揮)’ type Gyeolsongiban where the Provincial governor guided the entire litigation process. In the initial stage of the lawsuit, the plaintiff directly submitted the petition to the Provincial governor, and in the hearing stage, after investigation on arguments and relevant evidence, the Provincial governor instructed that the proceedings shifted from a civil hearing to a criminal interrogation. This demonstrates the characteristic of Joseon litigation where civil and criminal litigation procedures were intermingled. Furthermore, even in the judgment stage, the local magistrate did not make an independent judgment but submitted it in the form of ‘Uiyi Sangsin (擬議上申)’ (submitting with the local magistrate’s own opinion) and waited for the Provincial governor’s decision. The ‘Sangsin (上申)-Jihwi (指揮)’ type of litigation, where the Provincial governor guides the litigation process, is a unique Joseon litigation style, difficult to be found in Japan or China.