中德法律漏洞问题研究述评与展望  

Review and Prospect of the Research on Legal Loopholes between China and Germany

作　　者：曹磊 CAO Lei(Shandong University of Political Science and Law,“One Belt,One Road”Research Institute for Collaborative Innovative Center for National and Regional Studies)

机构地区：[1]山东政法学院“一带一路”国别与区域研究协同创新中心研究院,山东济南250014

出　　处：《扬州大学学报（人文社会科学版）》2020年第6期77-84,共8页Journal of Yangzhou University(Humanities and Social Sciences Edition)

基　　金：国家法治与法学理论研究项目“人工智能背景下类案检索的困境与突破”(19SFB2004);山东政法学院企业重整与风险防控学术创新团队研究成果。

摘　　要：随着国家法治水平的进步,法官的司法能力和应对疑难案件的技能明显提升。通过中国裁判文书网等大数据统计可以发现,法官越来越频繁地运用法律解释、利益衡量、法律论证、法律推理等法律方法解决推理难题。然而,鲜有法官明确承认案件存在法律漏洞并对其进行了填补,这种低调的姿态和含蓄的策略虽与遭遇法律漏洞的案件数量较少有直接关联,也与学界就该问题向司法实践供应的研究成果不足密不可分。梳理学界关于法律漏洞及其补充问题的研究成果,总结取得的成绩和存在的不足,有助于为该领域的进一步研究提供参考。With the advancement of the country s rule of law,the judicial capacity of judges and the skill to deal with difficult cases have improved significantly.According to the statistics of big data from China judicial document network,the research finds that judges use legal methods such as legal interpretation,interest measurement,legal argumentation,and legal reasoning to solve inference problems more and more frequently.However,few judges have clearly determined that there are legal loopholes in the case and filled them even if they actually carry out such operations.Although this low-key attitude and implicit strategy are directly related to the small number of cases with legal loopholes,it is also inseparable from the insufficient research provided by academic circles.Combing the research results of the scientific circles on the legal loopholes and the supplementary issues and summarizing the achievements and deficiencies can help to point out the direction for further research in this field.

关 键 词：疑难案件 法律解释 法律漏洞 漏洞补充 

分 类 号：D90[政治法律—法学理论]