CAJ | 학술논문

司法裁判的过程，其实是一个法律论证的过程。整体性的法律论证包含了三个方面的论证要求：它必须与过去的实践保持一致；它必须在现时是可接受的；它必须在未来是可欲的。这三个方面的要求对应着三种类型的子论证：融贯性论证、修辞学论证和后果主义论证。其中，融贯性论证满足的是与过去的一致性要求；修辞学论证满足的是现在的可接受性要求；后果主义论证满足的是未来的可欲性要求。而整体性论证正是由这三种子论证所构成的一个反思平衡的整体。整体性论证作为一种二阶方法，它也是对疑难案件法律方法适用的论证。
사법재판적과정，기실시일개법률론증적과정。정체성적법률론증포함료삼개방면적론증요구：타필수여과거적실천보지일치；타필수재현시시가접수적；타필수재미래시가욕적。저삼개방면적요구대응착삼충류형적자론증：융관성론증、수사학론증화후과주의론증。기중，융관성론증만족적시여과거적일치성요구；수사학론증만족적시현재적가접수성요구；후과주의론증만족적시미래적가욕성요구。이정체성론증정시유저삼충자론증소구성적일개반사평형적정체。정체성론증작위일충이계방법，타야시대의난안건법률방법괄용적론증。
The process of judgment is actually a process of legal argument. Integrity Legal Argument （ILA） requires three conditions to be satisfied： it must be consistent with practice in the past; it must be acceptable at present; it must be desirable in the future. These three requirements correspond to three types of sub-argument： coherent argument, rhetorical argument and consequential argument. Among them, the coherent argument seeks to be consistent with practice in the past; the rhetorical argument focuses on to be acceptable at present; the consequential argument commits the goal of being desirable in the future. ILA is the reflective balance of past, present and future. ILA as a second-level method is also the method of legal argument of how to apply correct legal methods in hard cases.