论我国民事诉讼中的科学证据

On Scientific Evidence in Civil Litigation in China

传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

归属院系:

法学院

作者:

沈奇妍

导师:

李祖军

导师单位:

法学院

学位:

硕士

语种:

其他

关键词:

科学证据;采纳规则;采信原则

摘要:

推进法治和科学发展是当今社会的两大时代特点,在法律的制定与运用的过程中时常能窥见到科学的身影,可见法律与科学逐渐融合、共同发展是时代发展的必然。面对这样的大背景,法官在审查判断的时候越来越离不开科学的助力,科学证据逐渐活跃在法庭之上并占据着重要地位,然而目前与科学证据制度息息相关的明文规定却依旧寥寥无几,无法满足诉讼现实的需要,科学证据的本质是什么,科学证据究竟该何去何从,法官应该怎样去判别和审查科学证据……成为了当前亟待解决的难题,给予科学证据更多的关注,构建和完善科学证据制度是我国法治道路建设上必须攻克的难关。  本文通过整合数据、分析案例、对比裁判等方式切入问题关键,剖析科学证据目前面临的问题,探讨科学证据的特殊性,并借鉴了几个典型国家和地区关于科学证据制度的经验,并在此基础上提出完善我国科学证据的具体建议。  本文共分为四部分。  第一部分有关我国科学证据的基础介绍,主要包括三方面:明确定义、证据分类和特征。本文通过比较国内外对科学证据的解读,在前人研究的基础上尽可能的明确科学证据的定义,认为科学证据是利用科学原理或者科学技术获取、分析的能够解读案件的内在联系或者证明案件事实的信息集合体。与此同时,将科学证据进行分类,使其与物证、鉴定意见和视听资料进行对比分析,从证据属性的角度对科学证据进行种类解读,认定科学证据与法定证据类别既有相似部分,又有特殊部分,从而分析了科学证据本身的特殊之处,需要制定新的规定来约束它。  第二部分两大法系的科学证据制度的对比分析。本文选取了较有代表性的国家包括美国、德国、法国的科学证据制度进行分析,重点剖析其科学证据的可采原理和采信标准,结合两大法系的共同性原则和特有性标准探索我国科学证据制度的完善之路。  第三部分针对目前科学证据的使用现状提出存在相关问题。分别从立法空白、司法现状和学理争议三个角度对科学证据的现状和问题进行了剖析,梳理了从立法到庭审、从理论到实践、从国内到国外的矛盾对立之处,根据矛盾提炼出目前科学证据需要正视和解决的问题。  第四部分对科学证据认定规则的构建与完善提出建议。结合科学证据的特性和借鉴国内外的相关经验得出科学证据的客观标准和主观标准,解决科学证据动态形成过程中的知识结构性、程序可靠性、专家的偏见、法官的偏信是解决问题的关键所在。

参考文献:

41

学科:

诉讼法学

提交日期

2019-04-11

引用参考

沈奇妍. 论我国民事诉讼中的科学证据[D]. 西南政法大学,2018.

全文附件授权许可

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • 论我国民事诉讼中的科学证据
  • dc.title
  • On Scientific Evidence in Civil Litigation in China
  • dc.contributor.schoolno
  • 20160042021568
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 沈奇妍
  • dc.contributor.affiliation
  • 法学院
  • dc.contributor.degree
  • 硕士
  • dc.contributor.childdegree
  • 法律硕士
  • dc.contributor.degreeConferringInstitution
  • 西南政法大学
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2018
  • dc.contributor.advisor
  • 李祖军
  • dc.contributor.advisorAffiliation
  • 法学院
  • dc.language.iso
  • 其他
  • dc.subject
  • 科学证据;;采纳规则;;采信原则
  • dc.subject
  • scientific evidence;acceptance rule;picks the letter principle
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 推进法治和科学发展是当今社会的两大时代特点,在法律的制定与运用的过程中时常能窥见到科学的身影,可见法律与科学逐渐融合、共同发展是时代发展的必然。面对这样的大背景,法官在审查判断的时候越来越离不开科学的助力,科学证据逐渐活跃在法庭之上并占据着重要地位,然而目前与科学证据制度息息相关的明文规定却依旧寥寥无几,无法满足诉讼现实的需要,科学证据的本质是什么,科学证据究竟该何去何从,法官应该怎样去判别和审查科学证据……成为了当前亟待解决的难题,给予科学证据更多的关注,构建和完善科学证据制度是我国法治道路建设上必须攻克的难关。  本文通过整合数据、分析案例、对比裁判等方式切入问题关键,剖析科学证据目前面临的问题,探讨科学证据的特殊性,并借鉴了几个典型国家和地区关于科学证据制度的经验,并在此基础上提出完善我国科学证据的具体建议。  本文共分为四部分。  第一部分有关我国科学证据的基础介绍,主要包括三方面:明确定义、证据分类和特征。本文通过比较国内外对科学证据的解读,在前人研究的基础上尽可能的明确科学证据的定义,认为科学证据是利用科学原理或者科学技术获取、分析的能够解读案件的内在联系或者证明案件事实的信息集合体。与此同时,将科学证据进行分类,使其与物证、鉴定意见和视听资料进行对比分析,从证据属性的角度对科学证据进行种类解读,认定科学证据与法定证据类别既有相似部分,又有特殊部分,从而分析了科学证据本身的特殊之处,需要制定新的规定来约束它。  第二部分两大法系的科学证据制度的对比分析。本文选取了较有代表性的国家包括美国、德国、法国的科学证据制度进行分析,重点剖析其科学证据的可采原理和采信标准,结合两大法系的共同性原则和特有性标准探索我国科学证据制度的完善之路。  第三部分针对目前科学证据的使用现状提出存在相关问题。分别从立法空白、司法现状和学理争议三个角度对科学证据的现状和问题进行了剖析,梳理了从立法到庭审、从理论到实践、从国内到国外的矛盾对立之处,根据矛盾提炼出目前科学证据需要正视和解决的问题。  第四部分对科学证据认定规则的构建与完善提出建议。结合科学证据的特性和借鉴国内外的相关经验得出科学证据的客观标准和主观标准,解决科学证据动态形成过程中的知识结构性、程序可靠性、专家的偏见、法官的偏信是解决问题的关键所在。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • The advancement government by law and the science development are now society's two great time characteristic, often can sneak a peek at the science in the legal formulation and in the utilization process the form, the obvious law and the science fuse, the communal development are gradually the time development necessities. Facing such big background under, judge in examination judgment time more and more cannot leave the science the boost, the scientific evidence enlivens gradually above the court and occupies emphatically the important place position, however at present and the scientific evidence system are closely linked regulations actually as before very few, is unable to satisfy the lawsuit reality the need, the scientific evidence essence is any, scientific evidence actually this what course to follow, should judge how distinguish and the examination……Has become the difficult problem which current urgently awaits to be solved, gives scientific evidence more attention, the construction and the consummation scientific evidence system is the difficulty which in our country government by law path construction must attack and capture.  This article through the conformity data, the analysis case, contrasts ways and so on referee to cut into the question key, the question which the analysis scientific evidence faces at present, the discussion scientific evidence particularity, and has profited from several typical countries and the area about the scientific evidence system experience, in this foundation proposed consummates our country scientific evidence the concrete proposal.  This article altogether divides into four parts.  The first part discusses our country scientific evidence the foundation introduction, mainly includes three aspects: Is clear about the definition, the evidence attribute and the characteristic.This article through quite domestic and foreign to scientific evidence explanation, studies in the predecessor in the foundation as far as possible is clear about the scientific evidence the definition, thought the scientific evidence is a collection of information that can be obtained and analyzed by using scientific principles or science and technology to interpret the internal relations of cases or to prove the facts of cases. and the scientific evidence and matter witness, the appraisal opinion and the litigant stated carries on the contrast analysis, carries on the type discernment from the evidence attribute angle to the scientific evidence, recognizes the scientific evidence and the legal evidence category both has the similar part, and has the special part, thus has analyzed the scientific evidence itself special place, needs the new stipulation to restrain it.  The second part is two big legal system scientific evidence system contrast analysis.This article selected had the representative country including American, German, France's scientific evidence system carries on the analysis, analyzed its scientific evidence to be possible with emphasis to pick the principle and to pick the letter standard, unified two big legal systems the common principle and the unique standard explores our country scientific evidence system road of the consummation.  Third part of this article asks the related question in view of the present scientific evidence use present situation.Separately from the legislation blank, the judicial present situation and the scientific theory disputed three angles have carried on the analysis to the scientific evidence present situation, has induced various domains scientific evidence existence question, combed from has legislated domestically to the hearing, from the theory to the practice, from to place of the overseas contradictory, according to proposed contradictory the present scientific evidence needs to face up to the question which and to solve.  The fourth part is to the scientific evidence recognized the rule the construction and the consummation put forward the proposal.The union scientific evidence nature and the third part of correlation model obtains grasps the scientific evidence objective standard and the subjective standard, in the solution scientific evidence dynamic forming process knowledge constitutive property and the procedure reliability and expert's prejudice and judge believes the question is the key is at.
  • dc.description.sponsorship
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2026-03-06
  • dc.date.oralDefense
  • 2018-12-02
  • dc.relation.citedreferences
  • 41
  • dc.relation.relatedpublications
  • 引言.............................1(一)选题的意义.................1(二)研究的现状.................1(三)研究的方法.................2一、科学证据的概述...............4(一)科学证据的定义.............4(二)科学证据的分类.............4(三)科学证据的特征.............8(四)总结.......................10二、两大法系科学证据制度比较.....11(一)英美法系:“双金字塔”模型的审查体系...........................11(二)大陆法系:有限制的自由心证...............................14(三)总结.......................15三、我国民事诉讼中科学证据存在的问题...............................16(一)立法空白...................17(二)司法现状...................19(三)学理争议...................22四、科学证据认定规则的构建与完善...............................25(一)填补我国科学证据的立法缺陷...............................25(二)完善我国科学证据的采纳规则...............................26(三)确立我国科学证据的采信标准...............................29结语.............................33参考文献.........................34致谢.............................36
回到顶部