供述类证据在民事诉讼中的合理使用路径研究  

Research on the Rational Application Path of Confession type Evidence in Civil Litigation

作　　者：张博雯 ZHANG Bo-wen(School of Law,University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences,Beijing 102488,China)

机构地区：[1]中国社会科学院大学法学院,北京102488

出　　处：《政法学刊》2024年第6期76-85,共10页Journal of Political Science and Law

摘　　要：随着刑民交叉案件不断增多、诉讼活动复杂程度日益加深,刑事与民事案件再难被视为完全独立的两个部分。在法治改革的大背景下,刑民交叉案件中关联证据使用“先刑后民”原则的法理基础发生动摇。由于供述类证据有较强的复杂性和不稳定性,若仍简单依照“先刑后民”的原则直接在民事诉讼中认可此类证据的证据资格和证明力,则原本止步于刑事案件的司法不公可能借此传导至相关民事案件。一方面应原则性肯定供述类证据在民事诉讼中的证据资格,另一方面要否定实践中将其作为公证事实或自认的做法。在认知维度,应当重塑民事法官对供述类证据的适用理念;在技术维度,需要明确供述类证据的证据种类,并严格限制法官对其证据资格的审查和证明力的认定。With the increasing number of criminal-civil overlapping cases and the growing complexity of litigation activities,criminal and civil cases can no longer be regarded as two completely independent parts.Against the backdrop of legal reform,the jurisprudential foundation of the principle of"criminal first,civil second"in the use of related evidence in criminal-civil overlapping cases has been shaken.Due to the complexity and instability inherent in confession-based evidence,simply acknowledging the admissibility and probative value of such evidence in civil litigation based on the principle of"criminal first,civil second"may lead to the transmission of judicial injustice originally confined to criminal cases to related civil cases.On the one hand,the admissibility of confession-based evidence in civil litigation should be affirmed in principle.On the other hand,the practice of treating it as a notarized fact or self-admission should be rejected.In terms of cognition,the applicable concept of confession-based evidence among civil judges should be reshaped.In terms of technique,the category of confession-based evidence needs to be clarified,and judges'review of its admissibility and determination of its probative value should be strictly limited.

关 键 词：刑民交叉案件 供述类证据 证据种类 证据审查认定 

分 类 号：D925.1[政治法律—诉讼法学]