推定规则研究

发布时间：2018-05-24 23:31

本文选题：推定规则 + 经验法则　；参考：《复旦大学》2011年硕士论文

【摘要】：推定规则是指在无直接证据证明某项未知事实的情况下,根据某种经验法则,从某项已知事实推断未知事实的一种证据法则。在承担举证责任方存在意识黑箱或三维黑箱的情形下,如果将举证责任完全分配给此方,将加大其通过诉讼进行维权的难度,使得最终结果趋于不公平。因此需要依靠推定规则得以认定。推定规则有基础事实规则、常态联系规则、推定事实规则以及反驳规则构成。推定规则在整个法律体系中占有相当重要的位置,推定规则的合理应用不仅可以提高法官办案效率,实现诉讼经济原则,还可以保障当事人的合法权益,维护社会公共秩序,以充分体现社会主义法制的公平正义原则。同时我国法律中对推定的规定,从表面上看,立法的数量严重不足,刑事推定规则就更少了,很多都没有明确使用“推定”一词,而是使用“视为”等表达,但其本质上就是根据一项事实与另一项事实之间的常态联系,对待证事实的推断。从深层次来看,体系化方面远远不够。例如,对推定规则缺乏概念化表述,如对基础事实、常态联系、推定事实等推定基本构成的概念就鲜有提及；刑事推定和民事(行政)推定没有严格区分……这些都会导致法律适用上的障碍。因此,完善民事推定制度是十分必要的。推定规则作为一种证据法则,笔者认为,其完善应该着力于立法工作,这样才能从源头上解决实际问题。推定规则的适用有利于提高诉讼效率、能够在一定程度更好地还原案件事实的本来面貌,但鉴于其或然性和主观性这两点局限,如果适用不当则会增加错案率甚至滋生司法腐败。具体可以从两个层次进行规制：第一个层次是从基本原则方面进行,主要规定的是各类诉讼程序都应遵循的推定方面的原则性问题；第二个层次是从具体操作方面进行,分别规定民事(行政)以及刑事诉讼程序所要遵循的不同规则。
[Abstract]:The rule of presumption is a rule of evidence to infer an unknown fact from a known fact according to a rule of thumb without direct evidence to prove an unknown fact. If the burden of proof is assigned to the party with consciousness black box or three dimensional black box, it will be more difficult to protect the rights through litigation, and the final result will be unfair. Therefore, we need to rely on presumption rules to determine. The rule of presumption consists of basic rule of fact, rule of normal connection, rule of presumption of fact and rule of rebuttal. Presumption rules play a very important role in the whole legal system. The reasonable application of presumption rules can not only improve the efficiency of judge handling cases, realize the economic principle of litigation, but also protect the legitimate rights and interests of the parties and maintain public order. In order to fully reflect the socialist legal system of fairness and justice principle. At the same time, the provisions of presumption in Chinese law, on the surface, the number of legislation is seriously insufficient, the criminal presumption rules are even less, many do not explicitly use the word "presumption", but use the expression "regarded". But in essence, it is based on the normal relationship between one fact and another fact, the inference of evidence fact. From a deep level, systematization is far from enough. For example, there is a lack of conceptualization of presumption rules, such as the notion of the basic constitution of a presumption such as the underlying fact, the normal link, the presumption of fact, etc., and there is no strict distinction between the criminal presumption and the civil (administrative) presumption. These will lead to obstacles in the application of the law. Therefore, it is necessary to perfect the civil presumption system. As a rule of evidence, the author thinks that the perfection of presumption rule should focus on the legislative work so as to solve the practical problems from the source. The application of the presumption rule is conducive to improving the efficiency of the proceedings and can to a certain extent better restore the original appearance of the facts of the case, but in view of the two limitations of its probability and subjectivity, If it is not applied properly, it will increase the rate of malpractice and even breed judicial corruption. It can be regulated from two levels: the first level is from the basic principles, the main provisions are all kinds of legal proceedings should be followed by the presumption of principle, the second level is from the specific operational aspects, The different rules to be followed in civil (administrative) and criminal proceedings are specified respectively.
【学位授予单位】：复旦大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D90-051

【参考文献】