透過對《清明集‧豪橫類》中所載各篇判詞作文本分析，本文認為：一、在判詞中，豪民與富民的涵義有別，豪民不單指富有的人。二、在判詞中，各個豪民在恐嚇或詐欺取財等不法行為上並沒有顯著差別。但豪民在發展社會關係時，常常與官方打交道，藉此取得某些特權，進而利用這些特權侵奪國家財政收入，這是值得注意的事情。三、在對豪民的文字描述上，名公們多以朝廷權威為出發，強調官與民之間應保持距離。透過比喻，將豪民描述成加害者，使受害者形象顯明，運用「警示」的語氣達到效果，塑造豪民「惡人」的形象。

Through analyzing the judgments of the Qingming Ji, the paper comes to three main conclusions. Firstly, the meaning between ‘Hao-min’ (豪民) and ‘rich people’ is different. The two terms can not refer to each other. Secondly, there is no significant difference in illegal behaviors between each ‘Hao-min’. In the development of a society, however, in order to gain certain privileges ‘Hao-min’ used to bribe officials and then infringing upon the revenue of the government. It is a noteworthy point. Finally, most of the descriptions of the ‘Hao-min’ are based on the authority’s point of view which emphasized the distance between officials and the public. By using metaphors, ‘Hao-mins’ are described as perpetrators in order to highlight the image of their victims. More then that, a tone of ‘warning’ was also used in the judgments to build up negative images of ‘Hao-mins’.