民间借贷纠纷举证责任研究

发布时间：2018-07-04 15:47

本文选题：民间借贷 + 举证责任分配　；参考：《吉首大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：民间借贷以其自身的丰富性、多样性和完整性,为大众创业、万众创新提供了巨大支持和帮助。但从客观上讲,我国金融和法律体系尚不完善,随之民间借贷风险的渐增,隐患的突出,使得我国目前民间借贷乱象丛生。反应在司法层面,就导致近几年来民间借贷纠纷案件数量激增、借贷金额大幅上升、纠纷类型日新月异、涉嫌虚假诉讼、非法集资等违法、犯罪活动越发突出、强制执行结案率低下等。目前我国民间借贷纠纷举证责任分配规则尚不健全是乱象丛生的主要原因之一。本文主要针对民间借贷纠纷中举证责任做的研究,希望对民间借贷的理论研究和司法实践有所裨益。首先,是绪言部分,包括选题背景、研究意义、文献综述、主要研究内容与研究方法。其次,本文对举证责任概述及分配模式进行分析。通过整理举证责任的基本理论,归纳出我国目前形成的举证责任分配模式:一般规则是“谁主张谁举证”,一般规则的例外是举证责任倒置及法官自由裁量。并通过对我国分配规则的深刻分析找到其存在的缺点,一般规则的缺点主要表现在:第一,规定表述不严谨,语义模糊;第二,未解决待证事实由谁主张的问题;第三,未明确阐述举证责任的内涵等。对英美法系、大陆法系举证责任分配模式进行总结、归纳,与我国举证责任分配方式进行分析、比较,从而提出我国应借鉴两大法系中举证责任分配的理论,提倡举证分配规则多元化,并为特定种类的法律关系制定与之相适应的举证分配规则,以力求达到个案的公平、公正。之后,本文分析了我国民间借贷纠纷的特殊性及其举证责任分配现状。考察到我国民间借贷纠纷具有数量激增、金额巨大、执行执结率低;消费性民间借贷与商业性民间借贷共存;案件证据少,查清客观事实难;刑民交叉问题、虚假诉讼现象突出等特殊性,已经构成了特性鲜明的特定种类的法律关系。而我国民间借贷纠纷中举证责任分配现状却是多重规范并用、分配适用不统一、自由裁量权未得到合理运用等,凸显了立法规定的滞后。最后,本文提出完善民间借贷纠纷举证责任的建议。认为需建立统一的民间借贷举证责任分配机制,对夫妻一方签字的借款,应当认定为夫妻一方的个人债务,但有证据证明为夫妻共同债务的除外;对笔迹鉴定的主体责任,分清情况,并明确被告拒不提供笔迹鉴定对比样本的法律责任;规范实体法,将举证责任分配规则写入《合同法》,规范借款合同形式、提供借款方式及履行方式;平衡当事人间的举证责任分配,审慎判断全案证据,合理使用法官自由裁量权。
[Abstract]:Private lending, with its richness, diversity and integrity, provides tremendous support and help for mass entrepreneurship and innovation. But objectively speaking, the financial and legal system of our country is not perfect, with the increase of the risk of the folk loan and the prominent hidden trouble, it makes the folk loan of our country appear in chaos at present. At the judicial level, this has led to a sharp increase in the number of disputes over private lending in recent years, a sharp rise in the amount of loans, a rapid change in the types of disputes, suspected illegal litigation, illegal fund-raising, and more prominent criminal activities. Enforcement of the low rate of cases, etc. At present, the rule of allocation of burden of proof is not perfect, which is one of the main reasons of disorder. This paper mainly focuses on the research of the burden of proof in the civil borrowing disputes, hoping to be beneficial to the theoretical research and judicial practice of private lending. First, the preface, including the background, significance, literature review, main research content and research methods. Secondly, this paper analyzes the burden of proof and distribution model. By sorting out the basic theory of the burden of proof, this paper sums up the distribution mode of the burden of proof formed in our country: the general rule is "who advocates the proof", the exception of the general rule is the inversion of the burden of proof and the discretion of the judge. And through the profound analysis of the distribution rules of our country, we find their shortcomings. The shortcomings of the general rules are as follows: first, the stipulation is not strict and the semantics are vague; secondly, the problem of who claims the facts to be proved has not been resolved; third, The connotation of the burden of proof is not clearly elaborated. This paper sums up the distribution mode of burden of proof in Anglo-American law system and civil law system, sums up it, analyzes and compares with the way of burden of proof distribution in our country, and puts forward the theory that our country should draw lessons from the distribution of burden of proof in the two legal systems. It advocates the diversification of the rules of distribution of proof, and formulates the corresponding rules of distribution of proof for certain types of legal relations, in order to achieve the fairness and justice of individual cases. After that, this paper analyzes the particularity of the non-government loan dispute and the distribution of the burden of proof. The investigation shows that the number of private loan disputes in China has increased dramatically, the amount of money is huge, the enforcement rate is low; consumer private lending and commercial private lending coexist; there is little evidence in the case, it is difficult to find out the objective facts; The particularity of false litigation, such as outstanding phenomenon, has already formed a special kind of legal relationship with distinctive characteristics. However, the distribution of burden of proof in the civil loan disputes in our country is multi-standard, the distribution is not uniform, and the discretion has not been used reasonably, which highlights the lag of the legislative provisions. Finally, this paper puts forward some suggestions to improve the burden of proof in private loan disputes. Considering that it is necessary to establish a unified mechanism for the distribution of the burden of proof of folk lending, and that the loan signed by one of the spouses shall be regarded as the personal debt of one spouse, unless there is evidence that it is the joint debt of the husband and wife, and the principal responsibility for handwriting identification, To distinguish the situation and clarify the defendant's legal responsibility to refuse to provide the comparative sample of handwriting identification, standardize the substantive law, write the rules of burden of proof into contract Law, standardize the form of the loan contract, and provide the way of borrowing and performing; Balance the distribution of the burden of proof between the parties, judiciously judge the evidence of the whole case, and use the discretion of the judge reasonably.
【学位授予单位】：吉首大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D925.1

【参考文献】