正当防卫案件证明责任的分配逻辑  

Logic of Allocating Burden of Proof in Justifiable Defense Case

作　　者：杨依 Yang Yi

机构地区：[1]复旦大学法学院

出　　处：《中外法学》2022年第4期1063-1081,共19页Peking University Law Journal

基　　金：司法部国家法治与法学理论研究课题“犯罪构成的程序性功能及其应用研究”(项目编号:18SFB3018);上海市教育委员会科研创新计划人文社会科学重大项目“中国超大城市新型社会冲突的数据地图与共治化解”(项目编号:2021-01-07-00-07—E00124)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：我国正当防卫案件的证明责任分配规则长期缺位,不仅在理论上难以形成基本共识,在实践中也容易引发“同案不同判”,严重限制了正当防卫的司法适用。回归证明责任分配理论的内在机理,可发现证明风险分担与实体规范要件存在深层互动。要件属性决定控方客观证明责任的履行范围,而主观证明责任之设置须兼顾一国刑事诉讼构造下的制度需求。破解我国正当防卫案件证明责任之难题,应明确被告人具有客观形势下的举证必要而非证明责任,并在此基础上激活司法机关职权调查对事实认定与权利保障的主导作用。The absence of rules on the allocation of the burden of proofin cases of justifiable defense in China has not only made it difficult to form a basic consensus in theory but has also easily led to“different verdicts for the same case”in practice which has seriously restricted the judicial application of justifiable defense Reviewing the internal mechanism of the theory of the allocation of the burden of proof reveals a deep interaction between the sharing of the risk of proof and the substantive normative elements.The attribute of element determines the scope of objective burden of proof,and the establishment of subjective burden of proof must take account of the system demand of a country's criminal litigation structure.To solve the problem of the burden of proof in cases of justifiable defense in our country,it should be made clear that the defendants have the necessity to provide evidence rather than the burden of proof under the objective situation and on that basis the leading role of function investigation of judicial organs in fact-finding and rights-protection shall be activated.

关 键 词：正当防卫 证明责任 客观证明责任 主观证明责任 

分 类 号：D924.1[政治法律—刑法学]