论取得之善意要件的证明责任分配

发布时间：2018-12-31 10:51

【摘要】：不论是在民事司法理论领域还是在审判实务领域,学者们对善意取得制度中关于“善意”要件证明责任应该如何分配的观点都莫衷一是。本文旨在通过实体法与程序法两大领域的分析,力求寻找出一个更加切合善意取得立法精神,更能体现民事诉讼法公平正义原则,并且充分考虑到当事人各方证明难易程度的分配标准,以解决目前民事诉讼实务领域“善意”要件证明责任分配标准不一的混乱局面。本文第一部分从分析两个在审判实务工作中具有典型意义的案例入手,归纳出案件的争议焦点和分歧意见,同时引出两个对立的“善意”要件证明责任分配标准观点。在第二部分简单陈述了我国实体法中关于善意取得制度的相关法律条文规定,并对善意取得制度中的“善意”要件在其他国家和地区是如何理解,以及在我国善意取得制度中如何解读“善意”要件进行简要分析。第三部分介绍了证明责任的基本理论以及证明责任分配规则的理论嬗变(其中包括规范说、危险领域说和盖然性说),并且简要陈述了我国证明责任分配的一般原则(即“谁主张,谁举证”原则)和例外情形下的倒置规则。第四部分中论述了善意取得的立法精神、设立目的和关于德国、日本、台湾在善意取得“善意”要件证明责任如何分配的相关法律规定或学理解释,并在本章末尾,介绍了在理论界与司法实务界被广泛支持和运用的分配标准,即依照我国证明责任分配的一般原则应该由受让人承担“善意”要件证明责任的分配标准以及该证明责任分配标准的理论、法律依据。在本文的第五部分,笔者在评析文章开头案例结果的基础上否认了由受让人承担“善意”要件证明责任的分配标准,笔者主张应由原权利人承担“善意”要件的证明责任分配标准更具合理性,并且通过对比两个“善意”要件证明责任分配标准的方式,就笔者的这一主张进行了合理透彻的分析。在文章的结尾,笔者从实体法和程序法的两大层面,提出了对“善意”要件证明责任的分配标准进行立法工作完善的相关建议,并认为在目前有待完备的相关立法的情况下,可以赋予法官自由裁量权来作为司法实务部门“善意”证明责任分配混乱的临时解决机制。
[Abstract]:Whether in the field of civil judicial theory or trial practice, scholars have different views on how to distribute the burden of proof in bona fide acquisition system. Through the analysis of substantive law and procedural law, this paper tries to find out a more bona fide legislative spirit, which can reflect the principle of fairness and justice in civil procedure law. And fully take into account the distribution criteria of the parties to prove the degree of difficulty, in order to solve the current civil litigation practice "bona fide" elements of the burden of proof of the allocation of different standards of confusion. The first part of this paper begins with the analysis of two typical cases in the trial practice, concludes the dispute focus and different opinions of the case, and at the same time leads to two opposing "bona fide" elements of burden of proof assignment standard view. In the second part, it simply states the relevant legal provisions of the bona fide acquisition system in the substantive law of our country, and how to understand the "bona fide" elements in the bona fide acquisition system in other countries and regions. And how to interpret the elements of bona fide acquisition in the system of bona fide acquisition in our country. The third part introduces the basic theory of burden of proof and the theoretical evolution of the rules of burden of proof (including the theory of norm, the theory of dangerous field and the theory of inevitability). The general principle of burden of proof in our country ("who claims, who proves") and the rule of inversion in exceptional cases are also briefly stated. The fourth part discusses the legislative spirit of bona fide acquisition, the purpose of establishment and the relevant legal provisions or theoretical explanations on how to distribute the burden of proof of bona fide acquisition in Germany, Japan and Taiwan, and at the end of this chapter, This paper introduces the distribution standards which are widely supported and applied in the theoretical and judicial practice circles. That is, according to the general principle of the distribution of the burden of proof in our country, the transferee should bear the standard of assignment of the burden of proof in "good faith" and the theoretical and legal basis of the standard of assignment of the burden of proof. In the fifth part of this paper, on the basis of analyzing the results of the case at the beginning of the article, the author denies that the assignment standard of the burden of proof of "good faith" should be borne by the transferee. The author argues that it is more reasonable for the original obligee to bear the burden of proof of "bona fide", and by comparing the two "bona fide" elements to prove the standard of distribution of responsibility, The author has carried on the reasonable thorough analysis to this proposal. At the end of the article, the author puts forward some suggestions on how to perfect the distribution standard of "bona fide" burden of proof from two aspects of substantive law and procedural law. The judge can be given discretion to act as a temporary solution to the confusion in the distribution of burden of proof in good faith.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D923.2

【相似文献】