刑民交叉案件中的事实认定与证据使用
龙宗智刑民交叉案件中的事实认定与证据使用
Fact-finding and Use of Evidence in Cases Involving Both Civil and Criminal Issues
期刊名称：《法学研究》
期刊年份：
作者：龙宗智
单位：四川大学法学院
中文关键词：刑民交叉;事实认定;预决效力;证据使用
英文关键词：cases involving both civil and criminal issues;fact-finding;predetermined value;use of evidence
中文摘要：
生效裁判事实认定的预决性证明效力，与既判力、争点效等概念既有联系又有区别。刑民交叉案件中，预决效力及证据使用制度的设置，应考虑司法的统一性与诉讼的独立性、效率与公正、刑事优先与民事诉讼自身规律等因素，同时注意我国司法制度与诉讼机制的特殊性。应确认刑事生效裁判事实认定的特别效力，但要受制于“必要事实原则”与“确定事实原则”。民事生效裁判可作为书证，交由刑事法庭判断并说明采纳与否的理由。刑事法庭判断民事诉讼判定的同一事实，应慎用“穿透原则”否定其合法性及有效性，即使否定亦应采用适当方式。对于特殊类型案件，刑事法庭应将民事诉讼判定的事实作为预决事实。对于证据交互使用，应区别裁判已生效与未生效、定案根据与非定案根据、人证与物证等不同情形进行处理。民事诉讼使用刑事诉讼中形成的人证，应遵循民事诉讼规律。对讯问、询问笔录、鉴定意见均应依法审查，注意证据方法与证据形成要素而作适当使用。
英文摘要：
The predetermined proof value of the result of fact-finding in an effective judgment is both connected to and different from such concepts as res judicata, issue preclusion, etc. In establishing mechanisms governing predetermined value of proof and the use of evidence in cases involving both civil and criminal issues, consideration should be taken of such elements as the unity of judicature, the independence, efficiency and fairness of procedure, the priority of criminal trial and the rules of civil procedure. Meanwhile, the characteristics of Chinese judicial system and litigation should also be considered. The special force of criminal fact-finding should be confirmed, but such force should be subject to the "rule of necessity" and the "rule of determined facts". An effective civil decision can be used as documentary evidence and submitted to the criminal court, which can decide whether or to admit it and give its reasons. The criminal court should be cautious in applying the "penetration principle" to exclude the result of civil fact-finding and if it finds it necessary to deny the force of civil decision, it should do so in a proper manner. In special types of cases, the criminal court should take facts ascertained by the civil court as predetermined facts. In deciding the admissibility of such evidence, the court should consider such questions as whether the judgment is effective, whether such evidence is used as basis of judgment, and whether such evidence is testimony or physical evidence. The use of testimony gathered in criminal cases by the civil court should abide by the rules of civil procedure. Records of interrogation and interview and expert opinions should be examined in accordance with law, and be used properly by taking into due consideration of the means of proof and the formation of evidence.
全文阅读： 点击下载
