同一认定鉴定结论标准研究

发布时间：2018-03-06 08:47

本文选题：同一　切入点：认定　出处：《西南政法大学》2006年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：同一认定鉴定结论，，属我国诉讼法中之法定证据。作为一个常识，我们知道任何证据唯有查证属实，才能作为定案之根据。而且随着诉讼的民主、公开、公正程度的增强，当事人程序权利保障的日益高涨，法庭审判直接、言辞原则的要求，对包括鉴定结论在内的证据审查、判断愈来愈提出了“苛刻”要求。鉴定人出庭已成了时代的呼声，故而鉴定人如何向法官与当事人证明作出的鉴定结论是真实可靠的，使法官如何采信鉴定结论，当事人如何相信鉴定结论是不可推卸之责。本文主要研究同一认定鉴定结论标准问题，关键是探讨能否制定标准、如何制定标准等一系列认识论。文章分成四个部分阐述，大约三万余字：第一部分有关同一认定鉴定结论真实性与真实性之证明。开宗明义的指出同一认定的目标——求真。同一认定结论真实性的含义，同一认定中真与真的认识之区分及其区分同一认定真实性与真实性证明的意义。第二部研究同一认定鉴定结论之技术标准。同一认定鉴定结论标准的含义应该界定为规范、准则，“即鉴定结论可靠性的必备要素”。同时论述了同一认定中鉴定人的自由裁量权，同一认定鉴定结论真实性的技术标准分为真实性的实质标准与真实性的形式标准等问题。第三部分论述同一认定鉴定结论的“法律真实”标准。“法律真实”标准含义：一是科学、经验与逻辑的可采性标准——真实性；二是法律上的可采纳性标准——证明资格。鉴定结论真实的证明资格标准是其关联性与合法性标准。证明资格标准不会导致符合法律的鉴定结论就是真实的问题，还需要鉴定结论证明真实标准。同一认定鉴定结论真实性标准包含两个方面：真实性证明标准的内在方面；真实性证明标准的外在方面，最终法官采纳同一认定鉴定结论“法律真实”标准——排除一切合理怀疑。第四部分：确立鉴定结论真实标准的意义。法官能够正确的采纳同一认定鉴定结论；鉴定结论真实标准的设定对鉴定人有监督、制约作用；避免当事人对鉴定结论一些无谓的争论。一言以蔽之，笔者在本文的设想是：一方面是保证鉴定人自己作出正确的结论，同时法官对诉讼中提交的鉴定结论进行合法性与真实性的审查，这即是同一认定鉴定结论标准的制定；另一方面，鉴定结论真实性标准之
[Abstract]:As a matter of common sense, we know that any evidence can be used as the basis of a final decision only if it is verified. Moreover, with the increase of democracy, openness and fairness in the proceedings, With the increasing protection of the procedural rights of the parties, the direct trial in the court, the requirement of the principle of words, the examination of evidence, including the conclusion of appraisal, and the judgment increasingly put forward "harsh" requirements. It has become a call of the times for the expert to appear in court. Therefore, how to prove to the judge and the parties that the appraisal conclusion made by the expert judge is true and reliable, how to make the judge adopt the appraisal conclusion and how the party believe that the appraisal conclusion is the responsibility cannot be shirked. This paper mainly studies the standard of the same identification and appraisal conclusion, and the key is to discuss whether the standard can be formulated and how to make the standard, and a series of epistemology. The article is divided into four parts, about 30,000 words:. The first part is about the proof of authenticity and truthfulness of the same cognizant appraisal conclusion. At the beginning, the author points out clearly the objective of the same cognizance-seeking truth. The meaning of the authenticity of the same cognizant conclusion, The distinction between the truth and the truth in the same cognizance and the significance of the authenticity of the same cognizance. The second part studies the technical standard of the same identification conclusion. The meaning of the same identification conclusion standard should be defined as norm, criterion, "that is, the essential element of the reliability of the appraisal conclusion". At the same time, it discusses the discretion of the expert in the same cognizance. The technical standard of the authenticity of the same identification conclusion is divided into the substantive standard and the formal standard of authenticity. The third part discusses the standard of "legal truth" of the same identification and appraisal conclusion. The meaning of "legal truth" standard is as follows: first, the admissibility standard of science, experience and logic-authenticity; The other is the legal admissibility standard-certification qualification. The true qualification standard of the appraisal conclusion is its relevance and legitimacy standard. The certification qualification standard will not lead to the problem that the appraisal conclusion that conforms to the law is true. The standard of authenticity of the same identification and appraisal conclusion includes two aspects: the internal aspect of the standard of authenticity proof and the external aspect of the standard of authenticity proof. In the end, the judge accepted the criterion of "legal truth" of the same conclusion-to remove all reasonable doubts. Part 4th: the significance of establishing the true standard of the appraisal conclusion. The judge can adopt the same conclusion correctly; the setting of the true standard of the appraisal conclusion has the supervision and restriction function to the expert; Avoid unnecessary arguments about the conclusion of the appraisal. In a word, the author's assumption in this paper is: on the one hand, to ensure that the appraiser himself makes the correct conclusion, and at the same time, the judge examines the legality and authenticity of the conclusions submitted in the proceedings. This is the establishment of the standard of the same identification and appraisal conclusion, on the other hand, the authenticity standard of the appraisal conclusion.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2006
【分类号】：D918.9;D915.13

【参考文献】