序言一
　　美國(guó)法學(xué)家德沃金將沒(méi)有清晰的法律規(guī)范加以確定指導(dǎo)的案件定義為“疑難案件”，認(rèn)為對(duì)于“疑難案件”，法官需要通過(guò)運(yùn)用正確的法律解釋方法以及價(jià)值判斷，發(fā)現(xiàn)案件的唯一正解。法律適用的結(jié)果是否存在唯一正解尚存爭(zhēng)議，但是法律適用方法的客觀化和統(tǒng)一卻并非不可能：法官通過(guò)運(yùn)用統(tǒng)一的、能為客觀標(biāo)準(zhǔn)所衡量的法律適用方法，作出契合法律規(guī)范和承載法律基本價(jià)值內(nèi)涵的裁判結(jié)論，在某種程度上也是回應(yīng)了統(tǒng)一適用法律的司法本質(zhì)要求。從方法論的意義上講，素以完備和嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)著稱的德國(guó)法律適用方法無(wú)疑對(duì)我國(guó)法律適用技術(shù)的完善和發(fā)展具有很強(qiáng)的借鑒意義和參考價(jià)值。
　　國(guó)家法官學(xué)院作為最高人民法院下屬的全國(guó)法院法官培訓(xùn)機(jī)構(gòu)，多年來(lái)一直致力于與各國(guó)保持著友好交流合作關(guān)系，并學(xué)習(xí)與借鑒他國(guó)有益的經(jīng)驗(yàn)。自1998年至今，國(guó)家法官學(xué)院與德國(guó)國(guó)際合作機(jī)構(gòu)聯(lián)合舉辦三十多期法律適用方法培訓(xùn)班，內(nèi)容涉及刑法、民法、行政法等多個(gè)領(lǐng)域，選取中國(guó)的案例，運(yùn)用中國(guó)的法律，采用德國(guó)的案例分析方法(歸入法、關(guān)系分析法)分析案件，得出結(jié)論。在舉辦培訓(xùn)班的過(guò)程中，參加培訓(xùn)的法官紛紛表示，此兩種案例分析方法邏輯嚴(yán)密，推理縝密，對(duì)中國(guó)法官分析案情、運(yùn)用法律具有很大的啟發(fā)和借鑒作用。在每期培訓(xùn)班上，法官們都對(duì)本套書所選的案例進(jìn)行了討論。通過(guò)這三十多期培訓(xùn)班的舉辦，這些案例被打磨得愈加精辟而具有指導(dǎo)意義。此次，我們將這些精選的案例結(jié)集出版，既是作為中德雙方在法官培訓(xùn)領(lǐng)域的合作成果展示，也希望這些凝結(jié)了中德法官的智慧和心血的作品能幫助更多的法律實(shí)務(wù)工作者。
　　本書的核心思想，即是以法院教育培訓(xùn)工作方針為指導(dǎo)，運(yùn)用案例教學(xué)的手段，以法官親歷式的教學(xué)方式，將法律適用方法融入個(gè)案的分析過(guò)程中，以期提升法官的法律邏輯思維能力、駕馭法律信息資源的能力以及將理論知識(shí)運(yùn)用于司法實(shí)踐解決實(shí)際問(wèn)題的能力。
　　國(guó)家法官學(xué)院院長(zhǎng)
　　黃永維
　　Preface 1
　　American Jurist Dworkin defines “hard case” as the one without positive guidance by clear legal norms. When dealing with such “hard case”, a judge needs to find the only right decision by making use of proper legal interpretation methods and value judgment. Though it is still controversial to say whether law application brings the only right decision, it is possible to make law application methods objective and unified; the utilization of unified law application methods measurable with objective criterion by judges to make decisions consistent with legal norms and bearing the basic value connotation of laws is a kind of response to the essential judicial requirements of unified application of law to some extent. Methodologically speaking, it is doubtless that complete and rigorous law application methods of Germany provide good examples and references for China’s improvement and development of law application techniques.
　　As a national judge training institution under the Supreme People’s Court, National Judges College has always been committed to maintaining friendly exchange and cooperation with as well as learning good experience from other countries for years. From 1998 to date, National Judges College has jointly organized over 30 training sessions concerning law application methods with GIZ, covering criminal law, civil law and administrative law, etc. By setting Chinese cases as examples, judges are trained to analyze cases and make judgments through applying Chinese laws and adopting German case analysis methods (subsumtions method and relation analysis method). Many judges participating in the training thought that the aforesaid two case analysis methods are rigorous in logic and reasoning, and they can draw inspiration and experience from them when analyzing cases and applying laws. Cases discussed in over 30 training sessions are now selected and published to exhibit cooperation achievements between China and Germany in judge training and show the wisdom and efforts of judges in both countries.
　　Guided by court education and training guidelines, this book uses cases to provide personal experience for judges, and integrates law application methods with case analysis, so as to improve judges’ ability of logical thinking in legal issues, ability to utilize legal information resources and ability to solve practical legal issues with theoretical knowledge.
　　Huang Yongwei
　　President of National Judges College of China
　　序言二
　　2000年以來(lái)，德國(guó)國(guó)際合作機(jī)構(gòu)(GIZ)中德法律合作項(xiàng)目與國(guó)家法官學(xué)院緊密合作，在民法、行政法和刑法領(lǐng)域，共同舉辦了長(zhǎng)、短期的法律適用方法培訓(xùn)班。2012年我們開(kāi)始將培訓(xùn)材料整理出版，這是雙方長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)卓有成效合作的又一重要里程碑。自2014年起，我們也相繼推出了法律適用方法叢書的電子版和英文版。
　　我們的培訓(xùn)教材以及培訓(xùn)課程旨在支持和幫助中國(guó)政府在依法治國(guó)的背景下實(shí)現(xiàn)審判專業(yè)化和標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化的目標(biāo)。從長(zhǎng)遠(yuǎn)來(lái)看，只有當(dāng)司法裁判和行政決定能清晰地在法律中找到依據(jù)時(shí)，法律的實(shí)施才是成功的。我們相信，除了淵博的法律知識(shí)之外，統(tǒng)一的法律適用方法亦能為實(shí)現(xiàn)司法裁判和行政決定的確定性和周全性發(fā)揮至關(guān)重要的作用。
　　秉持上述信念，我們很榮幸地向讀者奉上新一冊(cè)圖書《法律適用方法――知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法案例分析方法》。對(duì)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的保護(hù)，是知識(shí)創(chuàng)新型社會(huì)的基石。本書中，我們將討論知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法領(lǐng)域中中國(guó)法官所遇到過(guò)的典型案例。因此，本書的重點(diǎn)在于介紹適用方法，實(shí)現(xiàn)并鞏固統(tǒng)一解決模式的運(yùn)用。
　　本書中介紹的德國(guó)方法論由“歸入法”(Subsumtionstechnik)以及“關(guān)系分析法”(Relationstechnik)構(gòu)成。前者是在事實(shí)清楚的情況下解決案例的方法，后者則是在事實(shí)不清楚的情況下解決案例的方法。該方法論在德國(guó)是歷史悠久且根深蒂固的法律傳統(tǒng)。它在法學(xué)教育中的普及以及在法律實(shí)踐中的廣泛應(yīng)用，確保了所有法律專業(yè)人士都運(yùn)用同樣的方法解決法律問(wèn)題。
　　歸入法對(duì)于所適用的法律具有完全的獨(dú)立性。因此它能夠適用德國(guó)法、中國(guó)法或者其他任何國(guó)家的法律來(lái)解決案件。相對(duì)而言，關(guān)系分析法反映了德國(guó)民事訴訟法的基本原則，這些原則與中國(guó)民事訴訟法有一定的區(qū)別。然而，即使各程序法基于不同的原則，關(guān)系分析法也可以通過(guò)將其結(jié)構(gòu)適用于既定程序體系的方式，應(yīng)用于中國(guó)的法律。
　　我們?cè)诒緯�中編寫了一些適用中國(guó)法的案例作為介紹德國(guó)法律適用方法的素材。需要強(qiáng)調(diào)的是，我們僅僅是法律方法論的專家而不是中國(guó)法方面的專家。我們盡可能準(zhǔn)確地適用德國(guó)方法論解決中國(guó)的法律問(wèn)題。盡管如此，對(duì)于在適用中國(guó)法過(guò)程中可能出現(xiàn)的錯(cuò)誤還希望讀者予以包容。
　　我們衷心地希望，本書中的法律適用方法對(duì)來(lái)自中國(guó)各級(jí)法院的法官同仁的工作能有所裨益――這樣我們編寫本書的目的也就達(dá)到了。
　　我代表德國(guó)國(guó)際合作機(jī)構(gòu)(GIZ)中德法律合作項(xiàng)目對(duì)組織和支持本次出版的人員和機(jī)構(gòu)表示感謝。特別要感謝我們的合作伙伴國(guó)家法官學(xué)院的黃永維院長(zhǎng)、馮文利副院長(zhǎng)以及國(guó)際合作處處長(zhǎng)王曉芳女士對(duì)我們一如既往的支持和信任。
　　德國(guó)法律顧問(wèn)白蕊女士(Britta BeylageHaarmann)為編寫及改進(jìn)培訓(xùn)材料做出了巨大的貢獻(xiàn)。中德法律合作項(xiàng)目的德國(guó)法官楊翰博士(DrJohannes Schlichte)負(fù)責(zé)法官培訓(xùn)和交流活動(dòng)以及團(tuán)隊(duì)協(xié)調(diào)工作。胡蘭女士、萬(wàn)迪女士、趙曉蘭女士和路易斯先生(Lutz Grzonka)也為本書的出版做出了很多努力。我對(duì)他們表示衷心的感謝。
　　雅克博士(Jrg Binding)
　　項(xiàng)目主任
　　德國(guó)國(guó)際合作機(jī)構(gòu)
　　中德法律、消費(fèi)者個(gè)人信息保護(hù)、金融及質(zhì)量基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施合作項(xiàng)目
　　Preface 2
　　Since 2000 the Sino-German Legal Cooperation Programme of the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GmbH (GIZ) and the National Judges College of China have been closely working together in conceiving and carrying out long-term and short-term training courses on judicial methodology in civil, administrative and criminal law. In 2012, we began to publish the training material used in those courses, which marked another significant milestone in our longstanding and successful cooperation. Since 2014 we also publish electronic and English versions of our books.
　　Both our training material and our training courses aim at supporting the efforts of the P.R. Chinas authorities to professionalize and standardize jurisprudence based on the rule of law. In the long run, the implementation of law will only be successful if judgments and administrative decisions clearly find their basis in the law. We are convinced that, besides a profound knowledge of the law, a uniform method of the application of law is essential for reaching predictable and comprehensive judgments and decisions.
　　Following this conviction, we are proud to present the new volume “Judicial Methodology:Methods for Case Studies in Intellectual Property Law”. The protection of intellectual property rights is, among other things, the basis for a knowledge-based and innovative society. In this book we aim to discuss typical cases Chinese judges are confronted with in the field of intellectual property law. Thereby the main focus lies on the introduction of techniques that enable and enhance a uniform approach to solving these cases.
　　The German methodological approach presented in this book is characterized by the “subsumption technique” (Subsumtionstechnik), a method used for solving cases in which the facts are already clear, and the “relation technique” (Relationstechnik), a method used for solving cases where the facts are unclear. This methodology has a long and deep-rooted tradition in the German legal system. The fact that these techniques are taught in the legal education and applied in the legal practice ensures that all legal professionals have the same approach to solving legal cases.
　　The subsumption technique is completely independent from the content of the jurisdiction where it is applied. Thus, it can be used for solving cases under German law, under Chinese law or under any other law. The relation technique, on the other hand, reflects basic principles of the German civil procedure law which in parts are different from those of the Chinese civil procedure law. However, the relation technique can be adapted to the Chinese procedural rules―even if they rely on different principles―by taking these principles of the procedural system as a basis.
　　Accordingly, the case studies presented in this book serve as examples of how the German methodology can be applied to cases under Chinese law. We should stress that we are experts only in legal methodology and not in Chinese law itself. Nevertheless we have done our best to adapt the German methodology to reflect the specific characteristics of Chinese law as accu


SQS-2016-0617-bk0463.jpg