本文選題：司法會(huì)計(jì) + 司法會(huì)計(jì)鑒定��； 參考：《中國(guó)司法鑒定》2009年01期

【摘要】：目前,涉案會(huì)計(jì)事實(shí)證明中存在著幾個(gè)認(rèn)識(shí)上的誤區(qū)。諸如"司法會(huì)計(jì)就是司法會(huì)計(jì)鑒定","司法會(huì)計(jì)鑒定的主要功能是發(fā)現(xiàn)涉案會(huì)計(jì)事實(shí)","司法會(huì)計(jì)鑒定對(duì)象載體是財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)資料","只要是涉案會(huì)計(jì)事實(shí)的證明活動(dòng)就是司法會(huì)計(jì)鑒定"和"司法會(huì)計(jì)鑒定越客觀越好,應(yīng)該看到什么說(shuō)什么",等等。這些認(rèn)識(shí)不利于合理發(fā)揮各種涉案會(huì)計(jì)事實(shí)專業(yè)證明手段的作用,削弱了這些專業(yè)證明手段的證明力,影響了訴訟效率。
[Abstract]:At present, there are several misunderstandings in the proof of accounting facts involved in the case. For example, "Forensic Accounting is Forensic Accounting Appraisal", "the main function of Forensic Accounting Appraisal is to discover accounting facts involved", "Forensic Accounting Identification object Carrier is Financial Accounting Information", "as long as it is the proof of accounting facts involved," "Forensic accounting expertise" and "forensic accounting expertise" the more objective the better, You should see what you say, "wait." These understandings are not conducive to the rational play of the role of various professional means of certification of accounting facts involved in the case, weaken the proving power of these professional means of proof, and affect the efficiency of litigation.
【作者單位】： 上海市楊浦區(qū)人民檢察院;
【分類號(hào)】：D918.95

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 支貴生;張媛;;司法會(huì)計(jì)鑒定與社會(huì)審計(jì)的區(qū)別[J];金融經(jīng)濟(jì);2005年20期

2 ;[J];;年期

3 ;[J];;年期

4 ;[J];;年期

5 ;[J];;年期

6 ;[J];;年期

7 ;[J];;年期

8 ;[J];;年期

9 ;[J];;年期

10 ;[J];;年期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 黃喬;司法會(huì)計(jì)鑒定結(jié)論及其質(zhì)證研究[D];四川大學(xué);2005年

，

本文編號(hào)：1807203