本文試圖檢視日本殖民時代台灣賣女為娼的現象，在不同的法律文化之間的經驗究竟如何匯流、融合，而傳統的家父長制，又如何被不同的國家機制重新轉化。文中除檢視相關法令架構的變動外，另藉由觀察行政(警察)機關及司法機關的實踐，特別是透過覆審、高等法院判例、〈日治法院檔案〉中的公證書原本及民事判決原本，進一步呈現國家管制的不同面向。 清治時期，大清律例中雖明文禁止買賣子女，但並未有效阻擋社會中賣女為娼的情形。日治初期，統治者在統治上採取「舊慣溫存主義」，基本上承認台灣本島人的舊慣，故出現許多形式上是傳統契字、內容上卻融合日本時代新法律用語的賣女為自昌契約。但1910年起，司法機關開始以判決宣告此種契約，因違反公序良俗而無效。行政部門此時亦承受來自歐美各圓禁止人口販運的國際壓力，進而著手改革公娼制度，並引入司法公證制度來保障姐妓的工作條件。 對比日本帝國本身在明治初期引入近代西方式的法律制度時，對於傳統賣女為娼的狀況，司法上則切割為從事性工作的僱傭契約與金錢的借貸契約，使其在契約自由、法律當事人形式平等的現代法律外衣下重新復活。並且，公娼登記時亦以家長同意為必要條件，實質上仍是由家長賣女從娼，此時的法律反而透過明文承認家父長的實質權力，強化了家父長對女兒的控制權。

This paper examines the phenomenon of the traffiking of daughters into prostitution during the Japanese colonial period in Taiwan, the ways in which different legal cultures intersected and merged, and how the traditional patriarchal system was transformed and reinforced. The paper will examine shifts in legal structure and present different aspects of state control through observation of the implementation of laws by administrative (police)offices and legal institutions, particularly through reading the notarial certificate and civil judgment of court archives. During the Qing dynasty, even though the Qing Code clearly for bade the trafficking of children, the practice was still prevalent in society. In the early Japanese colonial period, many hybrid contracts were used by parents to sell their daughters into prostitution. The format of these contracts was traditional, but employed some modern legal terms. However, starting from 1910, legal institutions used court rulings to declare that such contracts were against public order and good morals, and therefore void. The administration was further subjected to international pressure to root out all forms of human trafficking, and sought to reform legal prostitution by adopting the public notary system to protect the working conditions of prostitutes. In order to address the situation, when the Japanese Empire adopted the western legal system, they divided sex work contracts into two categories, one contract for hiring and one for the loaning of money. The intention was to revive the practice of daughter trafficking into prostitution under the principles of freedom of contract and formal equality for all legal parties involved. Although the new law stated that permission from the family patriarch was required for a woman to register herself as a prostitute, in reality male heads of households continued to use this as a legal way to sell their daughters into prostitution. Laws of the period clearly assigned control over daughters to the family patriarch, reinforcing their right to continue this practice.