犯罪论体系推定机能与刑事主观事实证明

发布时间：2018-05-12 12:11

本文选题：犯罪论体系 + 推定机能　；参考：《政治与法律》2016年07期

【摘要】：犯罪论体系推定机能对刑事主观事实的证明具有重要影响。犯罪论体系推定机能不能转移故意、过失的证明责任,其作用仅限于违法阻却事由和责任阻却事由,故意和过失仍是控方证明的对象。犯罪论体系推定机能并不必然转移证明责任,是否转移证明责任还需结合具体的诉讼制度而定。犯罪论体系推定机能与刑事推定在产生基础、针对对象、是否转移证明责任、转移证明责任种类、适用范围等五个方面有所不同,不能将二者混同。因此不能认为犯罪论体系推定机能必然能够转移主观阻却事由的证明责任。通过对犯罪论体系推定机能的分析,能够产生两点启示:一是结合我国的具体诉讼制度,可以进一步研究被告人能否对类似阻却事由或者责任充足要件的事实承担一定的责任;二是可以为确定被告人承担主观事实证明责任的范围,提供较为明确的参考。
[Abstract]:The presumption function of crime theory system has an important influence on the proof of criminal subjective fact. The presumption function of crime theory system can not transfer intentional and negligent burden of proof, and its function is limited to the cause of illegal obstruction and the cause of liability hindrance, and intent and negligence are still the object of prosecution's proof. The presumption function of crime theory system does not necessarily transfer the burden of proof, whether to transfer the burden of proof should be combined with the specific litigation system. The function of presumption of crime theory system and criminal presumption are different from each other in five aspects: whether to transfer the burden of proof, the type of transfer of burden of proof and the scope of application, so the two cannot be mixed up. Therefore, it can not be considered that the presumption function of crime theory system must transfer the burden of proof of subjective obstruction. Through the analysis of the presumption function of the crime theory system, two enlightenments can be obtained: first, combining with the specific litigation system of our country, we can further study whether the defendant can bear certain responsibility for the facts of similar obstruction or sufficient elements of responsibility; Secondly, it can provide a clear reference for determining the scope of the defendant's burden of proof of subjective facts.
【作者单位】：辽宁省人民检察院;
【分类号】：D917

【参考文献】