시인이 판사여야 하는가, 판사가 시인이어야 하는가.
20세기 영국이 낳은 위대한 판사였던 알프레드 데닝은 법관이 갖춰야할 최대 덕목은 ‘시적 상상력’이라고 말했다. 실제로 영미법계에서는 판결문을 시로 쓰는 전통이 이어져 왔다.
이달 초 미국 필라델피아 주(州)고등법원의 마이클 이킨(Michael Eakin)판사는 판결문 전문을 아름다운 한 편의 시(詩)로 써 화제를 모았다. 시(판결)의 소재가 된 사건은 애완견의 교통사고와 관련된 손해배상 사건.
장그란도(Julia Zangrando·여)는 자신의 애완견이 피고 시풀라가 운전하던 자동차에 부딪쳐 다치자 개의 치료비 1150달러를 요구하는 소송을 내 1심에서 승소했다. 이킨판사는 이 사건의 항소심을 맡아 시풀라의 항소를 기각하면서 한편의 시로 판결문을 작성한 것. 이킨판사는 지난해 5월 한 이혼사건에서도 판결문 전문을 59행의 운문(韻文)으로 작성한 적이 있다.
{{|A groom must expect matrimonial pandemonium
when his spouse finds he's given her cubic zirconium
instead of a diamond in her engagement band,
the one he said was worth twenty-one grand.
when his spouse finds he's given her cubic zirconium
instead of a diamond in her engagement band,
the one he said was worth twenty-one grand.
Our deciever would claim that when his bried relied
on his claim of value, she was not justified
for she should have appraised it; and surely she could have,
but the question is whether a bride-to-be would have.
on his claim of value, she was not justified
for she should have appraised it; and surely she could have,
but the question is whether a bride-to-be would have.
The realities of the parties control the equation,
and here they're not comparable in sophistication;
the reasonableness of her reliance we just cannot gauge
with a yardstick of equal experience and age.
and here they're not comparable in sophistication;
the reasonableness of her reliance we just cannot gauge
with a yardstick of equal experience and age.
This must be remembered when applying the test
by which the "reasonable fiancee" is assessed.
She was 19, he was nearly 30 years older;
was it unreasonable for her to believe what he told her?
by which the "reasonable fiancee" is assessed.
She was 19, he was nearly 30 years older;
was it unreasonable for her to believe what he told her?
Given their history and Pygmalion relation
I find her reliance was with justification.
Given his accomplishment and given her youth,
was it unjustifiable for her to think he told the truth?
I find her reliance was with justification.
Given his accomplishment and given her youth,
was it unjustifiable for her to think he told the truth?
Or for every prenuptial, is it now a must
that you treat your betrothed with presumptive mistrust?
Do we mean reliance on your beloved's representation
is not justifiable, absent third party verification?
that you treat your betrothed with presumptive mistrust?
Do we mean reliance on your beloved's representation
is not justifiable, absent third party verification?
Love, not suspicion, is the underlying foundation
of parties entering the marital relation;
mistrust is not required, and should not be made a priority.
Accordingly, I must depart from the reasoning of the majority.|}}
of parties entering the marital relation;
mistrust is not required, and should not be made a priority.
Accordingly, I must depart from the reasoning of the majority.|}}
그는 이번 애완견 사건에서도 사실관계와 증거판단, 판결 주문(主文) 등을 영어의 운율을 살려 22행의 아름다운 시로 나타냈다.
{{|▼詩로 쓴 판결문▼
The poodles waited for the car, and
wacthed as it drew near,
The poodles waited for the car, and
wacthed as it drew near,
thinking there was naught at all to cause
them any fear.
them any fear.
For often cars would pass them by, but
this was no wayfare――
this was no wayfare――
the car began to veer toward them and
caution turned to terror.
caution turned to terror.
The car was coming way too close,
sometiong inside told her;
sometiong inside told her;
The next thing Mrs. Zangrando knew,
a poodle flew over her shoulder.
a poodle flew over her shoulder.
But Sipula didn’t testfy he saw the dog
dash to the street,
dash to the street,
yet he’d have this court assume such
caused the dog and car to meet.
caused the dog and car to meet.
Even if the poodle strained to reach the
leashes’end,
leashes’end,
applellant veered toward Angel, testimony we may not amend,
Unexpected perils do from time to time arise
Unexpected perils do from time to time arise
whose suddenness may obviate the fault
in our law’s eyes.
in our law’s eyes.
But while appellant touts this rule, no
matter how it’s styled
matter how it’s styled
He needs to have us find the dog was
llike the darting child,
llike the darting child,
and there simply is no evidence that
Angel did such darting
Angel did such darting
begore the car ran into her,trajctory
imparting.
imparting.
Be it interstate or neighborhood, drivings
gets no free shot
gets no free shot
at things they may encounter, whether in
the street or not.
the street or not.
So while counsel raises issues that are
worthy and well taken
worthy and well taken
in the end, we find the effort to apply
them here’s mistaken.
them here’s mistaken.
We must conclude the issues raised do
not warrant a new trial
not warrant a new trial
and all that we may offer now is this
respectful, rhymed denial.|}}
respectful, rhymed denial.|}}
시의 뜻을 풀어 쓰면 다음과 같다.
{{| ‘복슬강아지는 차를 바라보고 있었고 차는 어느덧 강아지 곁으로 왔네.
그곳에는 늘 차가 지나다녔고 그래서 강아지는 아무런 위험도, 두려움도 느끼지 않았지.
차는 갑자기 방향이 틀어져 강아지를 덮쳤고 강아지는 원고 장그란도 부인의 어깨 위로 솟구쳤네.
피고 시풀라는 강아지가 차도로 뛰어들었다고 했지만 입증할 수는 없었네.
우리(재판부)는 강아지와 차가 충돌했다고 볼 수 밖에 없네.
위험은 때로 예기치 않게 오는 것. 법도 급작스럽게 일어나는 피할 수 없는 과실은 용서를 하지.
피고도 “강아지가 어린아이처럼 차도로 뛰어들었다”며 사고는 피할 수 없는 일, 어쩔 수 없는 일이라고 주장하네.
그러나 피고의 말을 입증할 증거는 없네. 오히려 차가 갑자기 강아지를 덮쳤고 강아지는 하늘높이 곡선을 그리며 날아갔지.
큰 도로에서나 마을의 작은 도로에서나, 차도에서나 인도에서나 운전자는 갑자기 방향을 틀거나 덮칠 수 없는 것.
1심 법원의 사실관계 판단이나 증거채택은 다 잘된 것, 우리 재판부도 1심과 달리 재판해야 할 근거를 찾지 못했네.
그래서 우리는 피고의 항소를 기각하네.’ |}}
원고와 피고의 변호사들은 판결문을 보고 놀랐지만 이킨 판사가 진지하게 심리를 진행했기 때문에 판결문 형식에 불만은 없다고 말했다.
동료판사인 크레스(Kress)는 “이킨은 판사가 아니었다면 동화작가나 시인이 됐을 것”이라고 말했다.
동료판사인 크레스(Kress)는 “이킨은 판사가 아니었다면 동화작가나 시인이 됐을 것”이라고 말했다.
우리나라에서는 어떨까? 법조인들 사이에서는 문학(시)과 법(판결)은 결코 화합할 수 없는 ‘이물질’로 여겨진다. 시는 애매함과 불확실성을 속성으로 지니고 있기 때문에 명확성과 구체성을 생명으로 하는 판결문에는 어울리지 않는다는 것이다. 물론 판결이 시로 씌여진 예는 단 한번도 없으며 ‘문학적 표현’도 금기시된다.
서울대 법대 안경환교수는 “시적 표현이 판결에 부적합한 것이 아니라 판사들이 시적 표현에 서툰 것”이라며 “훌륭한 법률가가 되기 위해서는 어릴 적부터 독서와 사색을 통해 풍부한 교양과 시적 상상력을 갖춰야 한다”고 말했다.
2000. 7. 28. 동아일보 <이수형기자>sooh@donga.com