从具体案例论证明责任分配-毕业论文.docVIP

摘  要  一笔存单出现两个权利主张人，而且必有一人为真一人为假，法官面对这样 的案件，应当判决何者为真？何者为假？文章从笔者在司法实践中所审理的一个 案例导出意欲探讨的问题——案件事实如何认定及当案件事实真伪不明时法官如 何合理地分配证明责任。 要正确判决，首先即要正确认定事实。为此文章首先讨论案件事实如何认定， 并从理念和路径两个方面对这个问题进行了探讨，并反观我国现行事实认定模式 的弊端，提出可以借鉴英美国家陪审制中的有利方面来判决案件。 其次，当案件事实真伪不明时，法官就面临着如何依已预设在实体法中既有 的证明责任分配规则下判的问题，这构成了本文所探讨的第二个问题。为了回答 这个问题，本文从一般理论和比较法学的角度，论证了证明责任分配的一般规律。 并以该规律为标准，揭示了我国证明责任分配中存在的问题，指出了加以解决完 善的建议。就一般理论而言，本文阐述了证明责任的含义、法律性质及其功能， 还有证明责任分配理论的学说史述略。就比较法而言，本文简述了英、美、日等 国的证明责任分配之立法制度，概括出了其共同特征。就我国现状而言，由于缺 失相应的法律规则，对于案件事实真伪不明时如何分配证明责任的问题，法官们 或恣意裁量，或茫然失措，千差万别，很不一致。面对这样的现状，本文认为， 应当吸收证明责任分配一般理论的精髓，借鉴各国证明责任分配规则的共同成果， 制定统一的证明责任分配规则，用以约束法官在具体办理案件中所持有的“自由 裁量权”，促进自由裁量权的正确行使，使法官认定的事实尽可能接近客观真实。  关键词：事实认定  证明责任  证明责任分配 I ABSTRACT How should where there two claimants to a deposit receipt, among whom one is real claimant, the other isn’t judge at trial decide the man who is real claimant? From this fact, the author derives from the issues how to deal with establishment of the truth of fact and how to distribute burden of proof. By virtue of the fact that proper judgment is based on proper establishment of the fact of case, the papers first discuss how to establish the fact of case. The discussion starts it way through two aspects: idea and path, then reflects the defaults of the model of establishment of fact of case in China, and ends it way by the suggestion that makes use of the favorable points in British and American jury system in China. Secondly, when truth of case is uncertain, the question how to distribute burden of proof comes before judge at trial. In answer to this question, the paper explains the meanings and functions of burden of proof, which involved many theories correspondingly, then from the view of comparative law, gives an account of the rules of burden of proof in America, British, Japanese and soon. As for China, in lack of rule of burden of proof, confronted with the question how to distribute burden of proof, judges either make free use of discretion or are at a loss. Considering he