论借记卡纠纷举证责任分配规则

发布时间：2018-03-30 03:01

本文选题：借记卡　切入点：发卡行　出处：《首都经济贸易大学》2016年硕士论文

【摘要】：近些年,犯罪分子借助侧录设备、通讯工具和网络技术实施盗刷犯罪案件的数量逐年递增。此类犯罪所引发的借记卡纠纷中受害者既包括持卡人也包括发卡行,两主体举证责任如何分配是解决此类纠纷的关键。若能厘清裁判者处理该类案件的举证责任分配规则,既有利于维护持卡人的权益,也有利于金融业的健康有序发展。本文通过实证分析法、法经济分析方法、比较研究方法、文献研究方法等,针对我国现有司法实践状况结合国内外学者的观点,借鉴域内外先进立法经验,提出完善我国借记卡举证责任分配规则的意见。文章除引言部分外共分为三个部分。第一部分是国内借记卡诉讼纠纷举证责任现状。首先介绍了我国当前立法现状及存在问题,其次介绍了该类案件的司法实践现状,以发卡行过错形式对其是否应承担责任为切入点,再通过对各发卡行拟定的格式条款效力进行分析,最后通过国内近期十个借记卡纠纷案例探讨借记卡纠纷中举证责任分配存在的问题。第二部分是借记卡纠纷举证责任责任法理分析及评价。首先分析借记卡纠纷中的法律关系。其次论述了借记卡纠纷发卡行民事责任的归责原则。最后进行了借记卡纠纷举证责任责任学理探究,着重分析了举证责任分配的相关理论,为借记卡纠纷举证责任分配规则提供理论依据。第三部分结合域内外借记卡诉讼纠纷的举证责任分配规则,包括美国、韩国、欧盟及我国台湾地区的相关举证责任分配规则,提出对借记卡纠纷举证责任分配规则的立法建议。包括发卡行负担持卡人未妥善保管交易密码的举证证明责任,持卡人负担盗刷发生、伪卡交易事实的举证疏明责任,发卡行负担自身交易系统具备安全性的举证证明责任,发卡行不能提供ATM录像资料推定事实不利于发卡行,同时,明确持卡人作为金融消费者的地位并进行专项立法。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the number of crime cases committed by criminals using side recording equipment, communication tools and network technology has increased year by year. The victims of debit card disputes caused by such crimes include both cardholders and issuers. How to distribute the burden of proof between the two parties is the key to solve this kind of dispute. If we can clarify the rules of allocation of burden of proof for the referee to deal with this kind of cases, it is beneficial to safeguard the rights and interests of the cardholder. It is also beneficial to the healthy and orderly development of the financial industry. Through the empirical analysis, the method of economic analysis of law, the method of comparative research, the method of literature research, and so on, according to the current situation of judicial practice in our country and the viewpoint of scholars at home and abroad, Learn from the advanced legislative experience inside and outside the region, The article is divided into three parts in addition to the introduction. The first part is the present situation of the burden of proof in the domestic debit-card litigation. Firstly, it introduces the current legislative situation and existing problems in our country. Secondly, this paper introduces the current situation of judicial practice of this kind of cases, taking the form of the fault of the issuing bank as the starting point, and then analyzes the effectiveness of the standard clauses drawn up by the issuing banks. The second part is the legal analysis and evaluation of the burden of proof in debit card disputes. Secondly, it discusses the principle of imputation of civil liability of debit card dispute issuer. Finally, it probes into the theory of burden of proof in debit card dispute. This part mainly analyzes the relevant theories of burden of proof, and provides the theoretical basis for the rules of distribution of burden of proof in debit-card disputes. The third part combines with the rules of distribution of burden of proof in debit-card litigation within and outside the domain, including the United States, South Korea, etc. The relevant rules of burden of proof in the European Union and Taiwan region, and some legislative suggestions on the rules of allocation of burden of proof in debit-card disputes, including the burden of proof that the issuing bank should bear the burden of proof that the cardholder has not properly kept the transaction password. The cardholder bears the burden of proof that the counterfeit card transaction fact occurs, the card issuing bank bears the burden of proof that its own trading system has the security burden of proof, and the card issuing bank cannot provide ATM video information to presume that the fact is not conducive to the issuing bank, and at the same time, Clear the status of cardholders as financial consumers and special legislation.
【学位授予单位】：首都经济贸易大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D915.2;D925.1

【相似文献】