犯罪構(gòu)成要件要素證明困難下的推定研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-11-09 12:44
【摘要】：從實體法角度去審視程序法問題,是當(dāng)下刑事推定研究的短板。本文力圖彌補這一不足,選取解決犯罪構(gòu)成要件要素證明困難的角度作為重新研究的切入點,就推定存在的必要性、推定的價值效力、推定的原則適用及推定的定位等方面進行論證。 首先,在認(rèn)清由于存在難以取得必要證據(jù)而造成犯罪構(gòu)成要件要素證明困難的基礎(chǔ)上,提出進行推定的必要性,指出推定是根據(jù)法律規(guī)范或者經(jīng)驗法則所確立的基礎(chǔ)事實與待證事實之間的可以反駁的一種事實認(rèn)定方法。接著,重點論述了推定之所以可以解決犯罪證明困難的三個關(guān)鍵原因：即推定是認(rèn)定事實的一種方法、推定可以降低證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)以及推定能夠轉(zhuǎn)移證明責(zé)任。然后,為保證推定的適用符合實體正義與程序公正,從極限性、正當(dāng)合理性、不得二次傷害性、可反駁性、控訴等價性等方面對推定的適用作出原則限制。同時,整理散見于各類司法性文件中的推定規(guī)范,總結(jié)其在解決犯罪明知要素、目的要素、行為要素證明困難中的具體應(yīng)用。最后,通過與法律擬制、罪名降格以及嚴(yán)格責(zé)任的比較,明確推定是從程序法入手而對實體法自身不夠完善而產(chǎn)生證明困難的一種有利補充,指出需進行刑事一體化研究的迫切性與推定研究的重要性。
[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.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：浙江工業(yè)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.2
本文編號：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.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：浙江工業(yè)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.2
【參考文獻】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 溫曉莉;;論法律虛擬與法律擬制之區(qū)別——法哲學(xué)的時代變革[J];北大法律評論;2007年01期
2 劉仁文;刑法中的嚴(yán)格責(zé)任研究[J];比較法研究;2001年01期
3 褚福民;;證明困難的解決模式——以毒品犯罪明知為例的分析[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2010年02期
4 吳學(xué)斌;我國刑法分則中的注意規(guī)定與法定擬制[J];法商研究;2004年05期
5 李鳳梅;;法律擬制與法律類推:以刑法規(guī)范為視角[J];法學(xué)雜志;2006年01期
6 肖中華;張少林;;刑事推定與犯罪認(rèn)定芻議[J];法學(xué)家;2002年03期
7 張旭;張曙;;也論刑事推定[J];法學(xué)評論;2009年01期
8 汪建成;何詩揚;;刑事推定若干基本理論之研討[J];法學(xué);2008年06期
9 趙亮;;刑事推定規(guī)則幾個基本理論問題[J];甘肅政法學(xué)院學(xué)報;2010年06期
10 張洪成;;毒品犯罪主觀故意認(rèn)定問題研究[J];刑法論叢;2012年01期
，本文編號：2320450
本文鏈接：http://www.sikaile.net/falvlunwen/susongfa/2320450.html
