证明责任泛化理论批判--以“物”之争议的举证证明为中心  

The Theoretical Criticism on Generalization of Burden of Proof--Centered on Proof of Identity of“Things”

作　　者：胡学军 HU Xue-jun(Law Institute,East China University of Politics Science and Law,Shanghai 200042,China)

机构地区：[1]华东政法大学法律学院,上海200042

出　　处：《河北法学》2021年第3期17-33,共17页Hebei Law Science

基　　金：国家社科基金一般项目《民事证明责任的实证考察与制度重构》(13BFX069)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：民事案件中任何生活事实模糊不清时都一律按证明责任裁判来加以处理,是实践中存在的一种“证明责任泛化”现象。疑难案件中“物的同一性”证明问题也被归为证明责任分配难题,就是这一倾向的典型表现。证明责任并非解决事实“证明难”的理论,并非一切争点事实都附带证明责任分配问题。证明责任分配的对象仅为法律要件事实,而非笼统的“案件事实”,证明责任分配也无法为所有疑难事实问题的解决提供令人满意的答案。“物”之争议其实不存在证明责任分配问题,而只能通过具体举证责任机制,促进证据的供给来加以化解。When any of the facts in a case are blurred,it is to be treated as burden of proof,a so-called “the generalization of the burden of proof”phenomenon that exists in practice.The problem of proof of identity in difficult cases has been classified as the problem of burden of proof distribution in the past.The burden of proof is not a theory to solve the difficulty of proving facts,and not any problem of proof of fact is accompanied by the distribution of burden of proof.The object of burden of proof is only the facts of the law,not the general facts of the case,and the assignment of burden of proof cannot provide satisfactory answers to all the difficult problems of the facts.As a matter of fact,there is no burden of proof distribution,but only through the concrete burden of proof to resolve.

关 键 词：证明责任 要件事实 物的同一性 具体举证责任 

分 类 号：DF72[政治法律—诉讼法学]