民事诉讼中书证真实性问题研究

发布时间：2018-02-05 19:41

本文关键词： 书证形式真实实质真实完善　出处：《西南政法大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：书证作为我国重要证据种类之一，是以其所反映的思想、内容来证明案件事实的证据。我国立法规定，法官对案件作出裁判时应当遵循“以事实为依据，以法律为准绳”，而事实的认定通常取决于当事人提供的证据，法官对案件过程的了解也来源于证据。由此可见，证据是诉讼理论与司法实践上的核心问题，同时也是诉讼上的难点。如果能够合理、有效、充分地运用证据，那么就能在很大程度上促进司法公正并提高诉讼效率，进而促使当事人的合法权益得到充分保护。而提交到法庭的证据，如果要对待证事实发挥证明效力，就必须经过法官对其真实性、关联性以及合法性的审查。但在我国的民事诉讼活动中，由于缺乏可供法官遵循的书证真实性判断规则以及处罚机制的不健全，一方面容易导致法官在对案件事实的认定上滥用或怠于使用审判权，造成诉讼拖延；另一方面书证真实性规则处罚机制的缺失与疏漏导致当事人为了自己的利益而提供虚假证据或者滥用真实性异议权。因此，在我国现行的真实性问题情况的基础上，应当考虑对书证真实性判断进行相应的完善。本文以书证真实性为研究对象，主要分为以下四个部分：第一部分首先是对书证以及书证真实性的概述，，包括书证的含义及分类，同时指出书证真实性的内涵应当包括形式真实与实质真实，形式真实是实质真实的基础，具有实质真实的书证在形式上必然是真实的。书证的真实性应当是两者的统一。同时在第一部分明确了本文写作的意义，即对书证真实性问题完善的必要性。第二部分是对域外地区书证真实性规则的考察，主要论述了英美法系国家和大陆法系国家和中国台湾地区的真实性审查规则，英美法系国家对书证真实性的规则体现在验真规则和原始书证规则，两者为适应时代的发展经过了不断的发展与完善。大陆法系国家和中国台湾地区对书证真实性的判断都有详细的立法规定，特别是法国，对于书证真实性的规定有一整套非常齐备的理论体系。第三部分从立法、实践以及理论界法学家看法三个方面对我国现有的书证真实性问题进行分析。我国立法在书证真实性的问题上不够重视，相关的规则过于原则化，没有具体的操作方式，这导致实务中当事人相互推诿举证责任，阻碍法官对事实真相的查明，使案件久拖不决。许多学者已经注意到了书证真实性在操作层面上的问题，并积极寻求解决途径。第四部分为书证真实性规则的完善建议，首先确立了书证真实性完善的目标，然后对域外制度在我国运用的可行性进行了分析，重点在于论述书证真实性规则具体的完善建议。
[Abstract]:As one of the important kinds of evidence in our country, documentary evidence is the evidence to prove the fact of the case by the thought and content it reflects. According to the legislation of our country, the judge should follow "the fact as the basis" when making the judgment of the case. Taking the law as the yardstick, the fact is usually determined by the evidence provided by the parties, and the judge's understanding of the case process is also derived from the evidence. Thus, the evidence is the core problem in the litigation theory and judicial practice. At the same time, it is also a difficult point in litigation. If we can use evidence reasonably, effectively and fully, we can promote judicial justice and improve the efficiency of litigation to a great extent. Thus, the legitimate rights and interests of the parties to be fully protected. And the evidence submitted to the court, if the evidence facts to play a proven effect, we must pass through the judge to its authenticity. However, in the civil litigation activities of our country, due to the lack of rules for judges to follow the authenticity of documentary evidence judgment and punishment mechanism is not perfect. On the one hand, it is easy to cause the judge to abuse or slacken to use the judicial power in the determination of the facts of the case, resulting in the delay of the lawsuit; On the other hand, the absence and omission of the punishment mechanism of documentary evidence authenticity rules lead the parties to provide false evidence for their own interests or abuse the right of authenticity dissent. On the basis of the current situation of authenticity in our country, we should consider perfecting the authenticity judgment of documentary evidence. In this paper, the authenticity of documentary evidence as the research object, mainly divided into the following four parts: The first part is an overview of the book card and the authenticity of the book card, including the meaning and classification of the book card, at the same time, it points out that the connotation of the authenticity of the book card should include formal truth and substantive truth. Formal truthfulness is the basis of substantive truthfulness, and the documentary evidence with substantial truthfulness is bound to be true in form. The authenticity of documentary evidence should be the unity of both. At the same time, the significance of the writing of this article is clarified in the first part. Namely, the necessity of perfecting the authenticity of documentary evidence. The second part is the investigation of the rules of authenticity of documents in foreign countries, mainly discusses the rules of authenticity examination in countries of common law system, countries of civil law system and Taiwan area of China. The rules of authenticity of documents in common law countries are embodied in the rules of truth verification and the rules of original documentary evidence. In order to adapt to the development of the times, both of them have undergone continuous development and consummation. The judgment of the authenticity of documentary evidence in civil law countries and Taiwan area of China has detailed legislative provisions, especially in France. There is a complete set of theoretical systems for the authenticity of documentary evidence. The third part from the legislation, the practice and the theory jurist view three aspects carries on the analysis to our country existing documentary evidence authenticity question. Our country legislation in the book certificate authenticity question not to pay enough attention. The relevant rules are too principled, there is no specific way of operation, which leads to the parties in practice to shirk the burden of proof and hinder the judge to find out the truth of the facts. Many scholars have paid attention to the problem of the authenticity of documentary evidence at the operational level and actively seek ways to solve it. The 4th part is the suggestion to perfect the rules of the authenticity of the book certificate. Firstly, it establishes the goal of the authenticity of the book certificate, and then analyzes the feasibility of the application of the extraterritorial system in our country. The emphasis is to discuss the rules of authenticity of documentary evidence specific suggestions to improve.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.13

【参考文献】