刑事被告人财产说明义务的加重及其规制  

The Aggravation and Regulation of the Criminal Defendant's Property Explanation Duty

作　　者：张遥远 Zhang Yaoyuan

机构地区：[1]河南大学诉讼法研究中心,河南开封475001

出　　处：《行政与法》2023年第4期117-128,F0003,共13页Administration and Law

基　　金：2021年河南省哲学社会科学规划项目“黄河流域环境犯罪类案类判问题研究”的阶段性成果,项目编号:2021BFX016。

摘　　要：为弥补公诉方指控违法所得不足、解决法官裁判违法所得困难,我国刑事立法中出现被告人说明财产合法来源的规定,以被告人不能说明财产合法来源,证成涉案财产没收的正当性。这种由被告人说明财产合法来源,而非刑事追诉方查明涉案财产性质的规定,实则给被告人施加一种说明义务,且这种说明义务存在说明对象扩张、说明属性不明、说明标准模糊的加重风险。被告人说明义务具有存在的合理性,但应在司法适用中确立限制规则,在侦查机关履行全面收集涉案财产证据职责的前提下,以“客观限制”标准划定被告人的说明对象,明确被告人说明义务为客观证明责任产生的主观证明责任,适用优势证明标准。In order to make up for the lack of illegal gains charged by the public and solve the difficulty for judges in adjudicating illegal gains,Chinese criminal legislation has provisions to strengthen the defendant's explanation of the legal source of property,so that the defendant cannot prove the legitimacy of the generalized confiscation of property involved.This kind of stipulation that the defendant should explain the legal source of the property rather than the criminal prosecution party to find out the nature of the property involved in the case actually imposes an obligation of explanation on the defendant,and this obligation has the aggravating risk of expanding the object of explanation,unclear explanation attribute and vague explanation standard.The defendant's explanation is reasonable,but the restriction rule should be established in the judicial application,that is,under the premise that the investigation organ carries out the responsibility of comprehensively collecting the evidence of the property involved,the object of the defendant's explanation should be defined by the standard of“objective limitation”,and the defendant's explanation should be defined as the subjective burden of proof generated by the objective burden of proof,and the standard of explanation should be applied to standard of proof of superiority.

关 键 词：违法所得没收 被告人说明 说明对象 说明标准 

分 类 号：D924.392[政治法律—刑法学]