虚假自认效力认定研究--以裁判文书为分析样本  

Research on the Validity of False Self-admission--Based on the Judgment Documents

作　　者：龚梦滢 Gong Mengying

机构地区：[1]武汉大学法学院

出　　处：《北京政法职业学院学报》2023年第3期108-116,共9页Journal of Beijing College of Politics and Law

摘　　要：在事实探知绝对化的审判理念和实体正义价值追求的传统惯性下,《民诉法解释》第九十二条第三款以规制虚假自认为导向,对自认制度的审判排除效作出了限制。然而,该款在司法实践中的适用并未能实现其遏制虚假自认的立法预期,反而在法理上背离了辩论主义,使得自认制度提高诉讼效率之程序技能被架空。虚假自认效力的判断并非简单的两分法,自认事实的客观虚假亦不能阻碍审判排除效的实现。根据司法实践现状,在现行法的框架下,应通过明确“虚假”的认定标准以限定自认之审判排除效之例外,只有当自认事实与口头辩论全趣旨或自认之时,已有的证据调查结果相矛盾或明显违反真实以致有损社会公共利益或他人合法权益之虞时,法官才可免受该自认事实之拘束,综合全案材料对案件事实予以判定。Under the influence of the absolute judgment concept of fact-finding,Article 92(3)of the Interpretation of Civil Procedure Law restricts the effect of eliminating adjudication of self-admission with the guidance of regulating false admission.However,the application of this article in judicial practice does not realize its legislative expectation,but deviates from the principle of debate,which makes the procedural skill of self-admission to improve the efficiency of litigation be empty.The determination of the effect of false self-admission is not a simple dichotomy,and the objective falsity of self-admission cannot hinder the realization of the exclusion effect of trial.According to judicial practice,under the current law,the exception of the effect of eliminating adjudication of self-admission should be limited by clarifying the identification standard of"false",only when the self admission of facts contradicts or clearly contradicts the existing evidence investigation results at the time of oral debate or self admission,which may damage the social public interest or the legitimate rights of others,can the judge be exempt from the constraint of the self-admission and make a judgment on the facts of the case based on the litigation materials of the whole case.

关 键 词：辩论主义 虚假自认 审判排除效 自认效力 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]