论行政证据的证明标准

发布时间：2018-07-27 20:11

【摘要】：在证据制度和证明活动中，证明标准的重要性是不言自明的，证明标准是诉讼中极其重要而又难以准确把握的问题。不同时期，不同国家的学者对证明标准的含义理解各异。行政证据的证明标准自然也是行政证据制度中极其重要的内容。与民事诉讼证明标准、刑事诉讼证明标准相比，其具有自己的特点，应该根据行政行为的多样性以及行政诉讼的独特性确定中国行政证据的证明标准。我国《行政诉讼法》没有明确关于行政证据的具有可操作性的证明标准，致使司法实践对行政证据的证明标准掌握不一，学界也是争论不已。21世纪初，我国学术界对行政证据证明标准的讨论形成了争鸣之势，出现了不同的理论和观点。本文拟对各种观点进行梳理，并提出一己之见，希望能为该问题的深入探究尽一点微薄之力。论文主要分为三章，第一章主要厘清证明标准的概念、意义及其与相关概念的区别以及行政证据证明标准的特殊性。在第一部分中通过对证明标准含义的研究可以从一个侧面看出我国证据法学研究的轨迹和发展变化，，这也是本文的创新点之一；第二部分分析了证明标准与证明责任、证明任务、证明目的、证明要求和证明程度的区别；第三部分阐述了证明标准的特征和意义；第四部分论证了行政证据证明标准的特殊性。第二章介绍了证明标准的具体类型，分别从证据学上的证明标准分类和域外行政证据证明标准分类两个角度来阐述。第三章是全文的重点，在总结我国理论界对行政证据证明标准的各种探索后提出完善我国行政证据证明标准的立法建议。第一部分在分析我国行政证据证明标准的争议的基础上提出行政证据证明标准应坚持法律真实和多元化、层次化的证明标准体系；第二部分对近年来理论关于行政证据证明标准的有益探讨进行梳理；第三部分指明行政诉讼证明标准分类的考量因素；第四部分讨论了各种行政行为类型证明标准的选定；第五部分提出完善我国行政证据证明标准的立法建议，即以明显优势证明标准为原则,以优势证据证明标准和排除合理怀疑证明标准为补充，这是本文的核心观点，也是本文的第二个创新点。在文章的写作中，因为行政诉讼证明标准的资料比较缺乏，而民事、刑事诉讼这一面的研究却相对成熟，所以写作中采用了比较分析的方法，不仅借鉴其他部门法的研究成果，同时，也借鉴国外比较成熟的理论与实践成果，这种方法主要体现在文章的前两章中。第三章在分析确立我国行政诉讼的具体证明标准时，主要采用了实证分析的方法，举出具体案例来支持自己的观点，也使该研究不至于流于形式，具有一定的实践意义。
[Abstract]:In the system of evidence and the activity of proof, the importance of the standard of proof is self-evident, and the standard of proof is an extremely important and difficult problem to grasp accurately in litigation. At different times, scholars in different countries have different understanding of the meaning of standard of proof. The standard of proof of administrative evidence is also an extremely important content in the system of administrative evidence. Compared with the standard of proof in civil proceedings and the standard of proof in criminal proceedings, it has its own characteristics, which should be determined according to the diversity of administrative acts and the uniqueness of administrative litigation. The administrative procedure law of our country has not made clear the operational proof standard of the administrative evidence, which has caused the judicial practice to master different standards of the administrative evidence, and the academic circles have also been arguing continuously at the beginning of the 21st century. The discussion on the standard of proof of administrative evidence in the academic circles of our country has formed a trend of contention, and different theories and viewpoints have emerged. This paper intends to sort out all kinds of views and put forward some opinions, hoping to do a little for the further exploration of this problem. The thesis is divided into three chapters. The first chapter mainly clarifies the concept of the standard of proof, its significance and its difference with related concepts, and the particularity of the standard of proof of administrative evidence. In the first part, through the study of the meaning of the standard of proof, we can see the track and development of the research on the law of evidence in our country from one side, which is one of the innovative points of this paper, the second part analyzes the standard of proof and the burden of proof. The third part expounds the characteristics and significance of the standard of proof; the fourth part demonstrates the particularity of the standard of proof of administrative evidence. The second chapter introduces the specific types of proof standards, respectively from the evidential standard classification and the extraterritorial administrative evidence proof standard classification two angles. The third chapter is the focus of the full text, after summing up the various explorations of the standards of administrative evidence in our theoretical circle, the author puts forward some legislative suggestions to perfect the standards of proof of administrative evidence in our country. In the first part, on the basis of analyzing the dispute of the standard of proof of administrative evidence in our country, the author puts forward that the standard of proof of administrative evidence should adhere to the legal truth, diversification and hierarchical standard system of proof; The second part of the theory of administrative evidence in recent years on the useful discussion of the standard of proof, the third part of the administrative litigation certification standards classification factors, the fourth part of the discussion of various types of administrative acts certification standards selection; The fifth part puts forward the legislative suggestions to perfect the standard of proof of administrative evidence in our country, that is, the principle of proof standard of obvious superiority, the standard of proof of superiority and the standard of proof without reasonable doubt, which is the core point of view of this paper. Also is the second innovation point of this article. In the writing of the article, because the information of the standard of proof in administrative proceedings is relatively lacking, the research on civil and criminal proceedings is relatively mature, so the method of comparative analysis is adopted in the writing, not only using the research results of other branches of law for reference. At the same time, this method is mainly reflected in the first two chapters. In the third chapter, when analyzing and establishing the concrete proof standard of our country's administrative litigation, we mainly adopt the method of empirical analysis, cite concrete cases to support our own point of view, and make this research not mere formality, which has certain practical significance.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.3

【参考文献】