高空抛坠物侵权诉讼中责任人调查结论的定位与适用  

The Orientation and Application of the Investigation Conclusion of the Person Responsible in the Infringement Lawsuit of Throwing objects from High-rise Buildings

作　　者：邓文浩 DENG Wen-hao

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学法学院

出　　处：《江苏警官学院学报》2022年第2期24-31,共8页Journal of Jiangsu Police Institute

基　　金：西南政法大学学生科研创新项目“《民法典》高空抛物侵权责任的程序实现”(2021XZXS-280)。

摘　　要：高空抛坠物侵权行为发生后,公安等机关需对具体侵权人和可能加害人的身份进行调查,由此形成责任人调查结论。在高空抛坠物侵权诉讼中,责任人调查结论并非是起诉证据而是作为一般诉讼证据在诉讼开始后提交。责任人调查结论是证明具体侵权人或可能加害人身份以及“经调查无法确定具体侵权人”等要件事实的法定证据。在证明规则上,若无相反证据,人民法院应直接推定责任人调查结论所载明的事实为真实。此外,相关当事人对责任人调查结论的形式证明力、实质证明力及相关程序性事项的异议及其处理规则亦需进一步作出明确规定。After the infringement of throwing falling objects from high altitude occurs, the public security and other organs should investigate the identity of the specific infringer and the possible harmful person, and the resulting result is the investigation conclusion of the person responsible. In practice, the positioning and application rules of the investigation conclusions of the responsible person have not yet been unified. In a tort action of throwing at high altitude, the investigation conclusion of the responsible person is not prosecution evidence but submitted as evidence of general action after the ownership of the action. The investigation conclusion of the responsible person is the legal evidence to prove the identity of the specific tort-feasor or the possible perpetrator and the essential fact that "the specific infringer cannot be determined after investigation".On the rule of proof, absent the evidence to the contrary, the court should directly presume that the facts stated in the findings of the responsible person are true. In addition, the other party’s objection to the formal proof force, the substantive certification force and the relevant procedural matters and its handling rules should also be clear.

关 键 词：高空抛坠物侵权责任 公安机关 公文书证 法定证据 

分 类 号：D925.1[政治法律—诉讼法学]