• 作者： 陳聰富
• 作者服務機構： 台灣大學法律系
• 中文摘要： A legal system could be examined through either its structure, its substantive laws, or its cultural aspect. In terms of law and society perspective, the legal culture is the dominant factor influencing legal development. Informal social control and formal legal system are two dispute resolution models in human society. They exist or disappear depending on diversified social systems along with different timing. Informal social control dominates in traditional societies, while formal legal systems are popular in modern ones. Thus, people take mediation as a main tool to resolve disputes in traditional society, as litigation is prevalent in modern one. Similarly, while informal social control prevails in rural areas, people would like to revoke law to claim their rights in urban areas. Along with economic development, traditional society collapsed and modern society emerged. People in rural areas moved to urban ones, bringing metropolitan society to come. This development had great impact on people's attitudes toward litigation. In the same vein, people in traditional political culture were inclined to use mediation more often than those in modern political culture. In highly bureaucratic government society, people are more willing to use litigation as a way of dispute resolution. The transformation of socio-ecomomic development in post-war Taiwan provides a wonderful case to examine the relationships of litigation and social change. This paper takes a look at Taiwanese litigation rates and mediation rates as well, exploring the impact of social development on litigation and mediation. At the same time, it examines the differences between Taipei, Pindong county, and Hualan county, in terms of their litigation and mediation rates. This paper points out that Taiwanese litigation rates did not increase along with social development, although its litigation volume greatly increased. People did not prefer litigation to mediation even after radical social change. Taiwanese people went to the court only when depression was occurring. In the past five decades, social development did not dramatically change people's preference toward litigation. In addition, noticeable different litigation rates between countryside and urban areas did not exist, indicating that Taiwanese traditional values did not diminish after urbanization. More important, mediation was still quite popular among Taiwanese people in both urban and rural areas.
• 英文摘要： 於一國法律制度之考察，除法律制度結構與法規命令之理解外，就法律與社會的觀點而言，只有法律文化的探討，最能展現各國法律運作的特色。本文主旨在探討台灣人民使用法院進行訴訟與社會變遷之關聯。在研究方法上，本文觀察台灣五十年來法院訴訟的變化，與社會經濟政治變遷的互動關係，並探討此項互動關係表現出來的台灣法律文化。人類紛爭解決模式，可分為非正式（informal ）的制裁機制與正式（formal ）的法律制度。
  二者在不同社會體制下，或在不同時間點，經常處於互相消長的關係。傳統社會解決人與人間的紛爭，主要採取非正式的制裁機制，現代社會則著重正式的法律制度。因而在傳統社會，法院訴訟較不發達；而在現代社會，人類社會關係較為疏遠，法院訴訟因而頻繁。此外，在鄉村型社會，人際關係密切，經常以非正式調解機制解決紛爭；在都市型社會則偏重訴諸法院，主張權利。
  就經濟發展與政治發展而言，經濟發展之後，傳統社會逐漸瓦解，現代社會於焉形成。鄉村人口流向都市，都市化社會成為主要社會型態。相應此項發展，即為人民使用法院態度的轉變。再者，人民在政府官僚制度較低的傳統文化中，比起在現代政治文化中，更為依賴私人解決紛爭的機制。
  台灣社會五十年來的社會變遷，充分表現出上述各種可能影響人民使用法院訴訟解決紛爭的不同因素，但法院訴訟是否果真受到上述因素的影響，有待進一步研究。本文在時序上，觀察台灣法院五十年來訴訟案件量及調解案件量的改變與社會變遷的關係；在地區上，比較台北地區、屏東地區及花蓮地區等都市型社會與鄉村型社會，人民使用法院訴訟與使用調解制度的不同。此外，就台灣人民解決紛爭模式和司法制度的內在因素（法官人數、工作量、律師人數、訴訟之實效性等）進行考察，並進一步就司法制度的外部因素（法律文化），解讀傳統華人文化、商人文化及對司法的不信任態度等，對於人民使用法院訴訟的影響。本文指出，台灣法院的訴訟量因社會發展而增加，但訴訟率則未見顯著提昇。台灣經濟起飛時，法院訴訟率並未增加，反而減少。人民在經濟不景氣時，不得已才進行訴訟，因而我國的訴訟率只有在經濟蕭條時，才發生增加的趨勢。且長期觀察來看，台灣人民使用法院的頻率，在過去四十餘年間，未有重大變化，顯示社會發展未能真正改變台灣人民使用法院的偏好。
  就鄉村與都市的區別而言，台灣人民使用法院進行訴訟並無不同。足見不願興訟的傳統社會觀念，並未因「都市化」而轉變。更值得注意者，台灣的調解制度，無論鄉鎮市調解或勞資爭議調解，人民均樂意使用，多年來的使用頻率並未因社會發展而降低；調解制度作為紛爭解決制度的功能，也未因台灣成為工業化社會，而趨於式微。
• 中文關鍵字： litigation; social change; mediation; analysis of judicial statistics; legal culture; Confucianism; Taiwanese legal development; legal consciousness; urban and rural areas
• 英文關鍵字： 法院訴訟；社會變遷；調解制度；司法統計分析；法律文化；儒家意識型態；台灣律發展；法律意識；都市與鄉村