犯罪构成要件要素证明困难下的推定研究
发布时间：2018-11-09 12:44
【摘要】：从实体法角度去审视程序法问题,是当下刑事推定研究的短板。本文力图弥补这一不足,选取解决犯罪构成要件要素证明困难的角度作为重新研究的切入点,就推定存在的必要性、推定的价值效力、推定的原则适用及推定的定位等方面进行论证。 首先,在认清由于存在难以取得必要证据而造成犯罪构成要件要素证明困难的基础上,提出进行推定的必要性,指出推定是根据法律规范或者经验法则所确立的基础事实与待证事实之间的可以反驳的一种事实认定方法。接着,重点论述了推定之所以可以解决犯罪证明困难的三个关键原因：即推定是认定事实的一种方法、推定可以降低证明标准以及推定能够转移证明责任。然后,为保证推定的适用符合实体正义与程序公正,从极限性、正当合理性、不得二次伤害性、可反驳性、控诉等价性等方面对推定的适用作出原则限制。同时,整理散见于各类司法性文件中的推定规范,总结其在解决犯罪明知要素、目的要素、行为要素证明困难中的具体应用。最后,通过与法律拟制、罪名降格以及严格责任的比较,明确推定是从程序法入手而对实体法自身不够完善而产生证明困难的一种有利补充,指出需进行刑事一体化研究的迫切性与推定研究的重要性。
[Abstract]:It is a short board to examine procedural law from the angle of substantive law. This article tries to make up for this deficiency, chooses the angle of solving the difficulty of proving the elements of the constitution of crime as the starting point of re-study, on the necessity of the presumption existence, the value effect of the presumption. The principle of presumption is applied and the orientation of presumption is demonstrated. First of all, on the basis of recognizing that it is difficult to prove the essential elements of a crime because it is difficult to obtain the necessary evidence, the necessity of presumption is put forward. It is pointed out that presumption is a rebuttal method between the basic facts established by legal norms or rules of experience and the facts to be proved. Then, the paper focuses on three key reasons why presumption can solve the difficulty of proving crime: presumption is a method of determining facts, presumption can reduce the standard of proof and presumption can transfer the burden of proof. Then, in order to ensure that the application of the presumption conforms to substantive justice and procedural justice, the application of the presumption is restricted in principle from the aspects of limit, reasonableness, no secondary harm, rebuttal and equivalence of charges. At the same time, the presumption norms scattered in all kinds of judicial documents are sorted out, and its concrete application in solving the difficulties of proving the elements of criminal knowledge, purpose and behavior is summarized. Finally, by comparing with legal fiction, demotion and strict liability, it is clear that presumption is a kind of beneficial supplement to prove the difficulty of substantive law because it is not perfect enough to the substantive law itself. It points out the urgency of the study of criminal integration and the importance of the study of presumption.
【学位授予单位】：浙江工业大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.2
本文编号：2320450
[Abstract]:It is a short board to examine procedural law from the angle of substantive law. This article tries to make up for this deficiency, chooses the angle of solving the difficulty of proving the elements of the constitution of crime as the starting point of re-study, on the necessity of the presumption existence, the value effect of the presumption. The principle of presumption is applied and the orientation of presumption is demonstrated. First of all, on the basis of recognizing that it is difficult to prove the essential elements of a crime because it is difficult to obtain the necessary evidence, the necessity of presumption is put forward. It is pointed out that presumption is a rebuttal method between the basic facts established by legal norms or rules of experience and the facts to be proved. Then, the paper focuses on three key reasons why presumption can solve the difficulty of proving crime: presumption is a method of determining facts, presumption can reduce the standard of proof and presumption can transfer the burden of proof. Then, in order to ensure that the application of the presumption conforms to substantive justice and procedural justice, the application of the presumption is restricted in principle from the aspects of limit, reasonableness, no secondary harm, rebuttal and equivalence of charges. At the same time, the presumption norms scattered in all kinds of judicial documents are sorted out, and its concrete application in solving the difficulties of proving the elements of criminal knowledge, purpose and behavior is summarized. Finally, by comparing with legal fiction, demotion and strict liability, it is clear that presumption is a kind of beneficial supplement to prove the difficulty of substantive law because it is not perfect enough to the substantive law itself. It points out the urgency of the study of criminal integration and the importance of the study of presumption.
【学位授予单位】：浙江工业大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.2
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 温晓莉;;论法律虚拟与法律拟制之区别——法哲学的时代变革[J];北大法律评论;2007年01期
2 刘仁文;刑法中的严格责任研究[J];比较法研究;2001年01期
3 褚福民;;证明困难的解决模式——以毒品犯罪明知为例的分析[J];当代法学;2010年02期
4 吴学斌;我国刑法分则中的注意规定与法定拟制[J];法商研究;2004年05期
5 李凤梅;;法律拟制与法律类推:以刑法规范为视角[J];法学杂志;2006年01期
6 肖中华;张少林;;刑事推定与犯罪认定刍议[J];法学家;2002年03期
7 张旭;张曙;;也论刑事推定[J];法学评论;2009年01期
8 汪建成;何诗扬;;刑事推定若干基本理论之研讨[J];法学;2008年06期
9 赵亮;;刑事推定规则几个基本理论问题[J];甘肃政法学院学报;2010年06期
10 张洪成;;毒品犯罪主观故意认定问题研究[J];刑法论丛;2012年01期
，本文编号：2320450
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/susongfa/2320450.html
