论已决事实的效力

发布时间：2018-02-09 01:16

本文关键词： 已决事实既判力程序内确定力证明力预决效力　出处：《烟台大学》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：已决事实的效力分为两个层面,其一是法律效力表现为既判力与程序内确定力。既判力及于裁决书中主文中的事实,而程序内确定力及于裁决书理由部分的事实。其二,已决事实作为一种客观存在,具有作为证据的潜能,常常体现为一种书证,具有证明力属于在事实方面的效力。既判力是通过诉讼程序,经由裁判产生的对诉讼争议的处理结果的一种确定力是一种保持诉讼争议的处理结果的状态不变的内在作用力。程序内确定力则是程序内阶段性事实判断的拘束力,被闭锁在程序之内。两者皆表现为诉讼法上的效果,发生根据则是诉讼法的实现即诉讼法被有效实施。因此,实体法上不当的判决依然获得既判力。因为实体法在既判力的发生根据中并无立足之地。另外,既判力的发生根据不同突破既判力的根据。再审的实质是对已经获得既判力的裁判予以推翻,其发生并非因既判力没有获得。突破既判力的依据包括诉讼程序上的不当以及实体法上的不当。而已决事实的事实方面的作用与其说是效力不如说任何一种存在事物所具有的秉性---作为潜在的证据。由于已决事实既有法律效力又存在事实层面的效力,因此在实践中其表现为什么性质的效力则要具体分析。而已决事实的预决效力则与已决事实法律效力及事实效力有着重大关联。具有既判力的事实才具有绝对的预决效力,相对预决效力则与某些已决事实具有较高证明力相联系。由于已决事实效力在后诉中表现样态的复杂性,故而由立法规定则显得力不从心。
[Abstract]:The validity of determined facts can be divided into two levels, one is that the legal effect is the res judicata and the determination in the procedure, the res judicata extends to the facts in the main text of the award, and the determination in the procedure is the facts of the reasons for the award. As an objective existence, the determined fact has the potential as evidence, which is often reflected in a documentary evidence, and the force of proof belongs to the validity of the facts. A kind of certainty of the result of handling a lawsuit dispute produced by a judge is an internal force that keeps the state of the outcome of a lawsuit dispute unchanged. The determination force within the procedure is the binding force of the judgment of the fact within the procedure. Being locked in the procedure. Both of them are the effect of the procedural law, and the basis is the realization of the procedural law, that is, the procedural law is effectively implemented. An improper judgment in substantive law still acquires res judicata, because substantive law has no place in the basis of res judicata. The occurrence of res judicata is based on different breakthroughs in the basis of res judicata. The essence of a retrial is to overturn a judge who has obtained res judicata. It is not because res judicata has not been obtained. The basis for breaking the res judicata includes improper litigation procedures and improper substantive law. The factual role of facts is not so much effective as that of any kind of existence. The nature of things-as potential evidence. Because determined facts have both legal and factual effects, Therefore, in practice, it is necessary to analyze concretely the effect of what nature it displays. The pre-determination effect of the decided fact has a significant connection with the legal effect and the factual effect of the determined fact. Only the fact with res judicata has absolute pre-determination effect, Because of the complexity of the manifestation of the validity of the determined facts in the latter case, the legislative provisions appear to be unable to do so.
【学位授予单位】：烟台大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D915

【参考文献】