發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-05-18 03:29

  本文選題：民事訴訟 + 書面證據(jù)�。� 參考：《河南大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：在我國(guó)民事訴訟的證據(jù)類型中，書證一直占有舉足輕重的位置，基于我國(guó)傳統(tǒng)法制與現(xiàn)代大陸法的傳統(tǒng)，我國(guó)在司法實(shí)踐中呈現(xiàn)出極為明顯的“書證中心主義”。不僅如此，各種類型證據(jù)的書面化傾向也在審判實(shí)務(wù)中越來越凸顯�！白C據(jù)決定程序”，正確把握我國(guó)民事訴訟實(shí)踐中證據(jù)運(yùn)行情況，就抓住了我國(guó)民事訴訟程序的關(guān)鍵要素，以此為依據(jù)，探索民事訴訟程序改革途徑才比較可靠。 本文采用實(shí)證研究的方法，，筆者選取H省三個(gè)中級(jí)人民法院與三個(gè)基層人民法院，以其2010年、2011年和2012年三年中532個(gè)民事案件一審裁判文書為基礎(chǔ)對(duì)其證據(jù)進(jìn)行分析，得出民事訴訟證據(jù)單一化、傾向化現(xiàn)象的實(shí)踐運(yùn)行特點(diǎn)。并在此基礎(chǔ)上分析這種傾向產(chǎn)生的原因，合理性層面與帶來的問題，并結(jié)合我國(guó)司法的實(shí)踐運(yùn)行狀況，法律法規(guī)的具體規(guī)定，針對(duì)性的提出改進(jìn)的方法。正文分為四個(gè)部分，內(nèi)容安排如下： 第一部分為我國(guó)民事訴訟證據(jù)實(shí)踐運(yùn)行狀況及特點(diǎn)。該部分首先對(duì)筆者獲取的第一手實(shí)證資料進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計(jì)分析，得出我國(guó)民事訴訟證據(jù)書證單一化傾向十分明顯與書面證據(jù)在司法實(shí)踐中被大量使用的結(jié)論。而后基于對(duì)審判實(shí)踐運(yùn)行情況的實(shí)際調(diào)查，歸納其特點(diǎn)。 第二部分為我國(guó)民事訴訟證據(jù)依賴書面證據(jù)的原因。首先對(duì)書面證據(jù)自身優(yōu)勢(shì)進(jìn)行比較分析總結(jié)出書面證據(jù)與其他類型證據(jù)相比的優(yōu)點(diǎn)。其次基于我國(guó)古代法制傳統(tǒng)與儒家息訟文化的傳承來分析我國(guó)民事訴訟中對(duì)書證等書面證據(jù)的心理依賴。再次根據(jù)審判中法官對(duì)證據(jù)采信的角度對(duì)當(dāng)事人為什么更愿意選擇書證作為其訴訟證據(jù)來進(jìn)行原因分析。最后則是根據(jù)我國(guó)現(xiàn)行的民事實(shí)體法等法律文件對(duì)一定類型的法律行為的書面方式進(jìn)行的強(qiáng)制性規(guī)定的分析，得出實(shí)體法對(duì)該類證據(jù)的青睞。 第三部分為證據(jù)單一化、書面化傾向的合理性層面。該部分是基于兩個(gè)法院的案例來進(jìn)行合理性論證。通過對(duì)這兩個(gè)案例中證據(jù)的來源與采信情況的總結(jié)分析，得出證據(jù)單一化、書面化傾向不僅是我國(guó)現(xiàn)行法律制度、行政體制以及民商事活動(dòng)的內(nèi)在要求與司法實(shí)踐的必然趨勢(shì)，而且也是法官在審判工作中防范司法風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的必然性選擇。 第四部分為證據(jù)單一化、書面化傾向問題及其改進(jìn)路徑。由于書證等書面證據(jù)的大量使用，其真?zhèn)闻袛鄦栴}就顯得尤為重要，為此有必要對(duì)真?zhèn)闻袛嗟某绦蚺c方法進(jìn)行明確的規(guī)定。其次，書面證據(jù)在訴訟中被第三方占有的情況多有發(fā)生，因此應(yīng)細(xì)化案外人提供證據(jù)的程序性規(guī)定與拒不提供的法律后果。最后，案件事實(shí)的查明依賴的證據(jù)應(yīng)該是多元的，應(yīng)當(dāng)關(guān)注證人出庭及證人證言真實(shí)性的制度保障，改善法官對(duì)證人不信任的司法現(xiàn)狀。
[Abstract]:In the evidence types of civil litigation in China, documentary evidence has always played an important role. Based on the tradition of Chinese traditional legal system and modern continental law, there is a very obvious "documentary centralism" in judicial practice in our country. Moreover, the written tendency of various types of evidence is more and more prominent in trial practice. "evidence decides procedure", correctly grasps the evidence operation situation in our country's civil litigation practice, has grasped the key elements of our country's civil procedure, takes this as the basis, explores the civil procedure reform way to be more reliable. In this paper, the author chooses three intermediate people's courts and three grass-roots people's courts in H province to analyze the evidence based on 532 documents of first instance adjudication of civil cases in 2010, 2011 and 2012. The paper draws the characteristics of the practice operation of the single and inclined evidence in civil litigation. On this basis, this paper analyzes the causes of this tendency, the rationality level and the problems brought about, and combines the practice of our country's judicial operation, the specific provisions of laws and regulations, and puts forward targeted improvement methods. The text is divided into four parts, which are arranged as follows: The first part is the operation and characteristics of evidence in civil litigation in China. In this part, the author firstly makes a statistical analysis of the firsthand empirical data obtained by the author, and draws the conclusion that the single tendency of documentary evidence is very obvious and written evidence is widely used in judicial practice in our country. Then based on the actual investigation of the operation of trial practice, summarize its characteristics. The second part is the reason why the evidence of civil action depends on written evidence. Firstly, the advantages of written evidence compared with other types of evidence are analyzed and summarized. Secondly, based on the tradition of ancient Chinese legal system and the inheritance of Confucian culture of litigation, this paper analyzes the psychological dependence of documentary evidence such as documentary evidence in civil litigation in China. Thirdly, according to the judge's acceptance of evidence in the trial, the author analyzes the reasons why the parties are more willing to choose documentary evidence as their lawsuit evidence. Finally, based on the analysis of the mandatory provisions on the written form of certain types of legal acts in China's current civil substantive law and other legal documents, the author draws the conclusion that the substantive law is in favor of this kind of evidence. The third part is the rationality level of evidence simplification and written tendency. This part is based on the case of the two courts to conduct reasonable argument. Through summing up and analyzing the source and acceptance of evidence in these two cases, it is concluded that the unitization of evidence and the tendency of writing are not only the inherent requirements of the current legal system, administrative system, civil and commercial activities and the inevitable trend of judicial practice in China, but also in the practice of civil and commercial affairs. Moreover, it is the inevitable choice for judges to guard against judicial risks in judicial work. The fourth part is the evidence simplification, the written tendency problem and its improvement path. Due to the extensive use of documentary evidence such as documentary evidence, it is particularly important to judge its authenticity. Therefore, it is necessary to make clear provisions on the procedure and methods for judging authenticity and falsehood. Secondly, the case that written evidence is in the possession of third party often occurs in litigation, so the procedural provisions and the legal consequences of refusing to provide evidence should be detailed. Finally, the investigation of the facts of the case should rely on multiple evidence, and should pay attention to the system guarantee of the witness appearing in court and the authenticity of witness testimony, and improve the judicial status quo of the judge's distrust of the witness.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D925.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 李彤;;古代書證制度的司法運(yùn)行及制約因素——以司法案例為中心的制度考察[J];證據(jù)科學(xué);2008年02期

本文編號(hào)：1904179