本文選題：刑事裁判規(guī)則 + 事實判斷�。� 參考：《山東大學》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：目前,學術界和審判實務界對裁判規(guī)則進行研究的專門著作很少,對裁判規(guī)則的界定也很不統(tǒng)一,存在分歧。本文在現(xiàn)有研究的基礎上,并在與其它相似概念相辨析的情況下,認為刑事裁判規(guī)則是指在具體的刑事審判活動中,由法官根據(jù)特定的案件事實對刑法文本規(guī)范進行建構而形成的適用于具體刑事個案的規(guī)則。 在刑事案件的審理過程中,法官最主要的任務便是建構適合該案的刑事裁判規(guī)則,這就要求法官應當展示該裁判規(guī)則的建構過程與建構方法。因此研究刑事裁判規(guī)則的建構具有重要的意義和現(xiàn)實必要性。首先,研究刑事裁判規(guī)則的構建有助于增強判決結論的說服力。法官如果能在裁判文書中展示自己建構刑事裁判規(guī)則的思維過程,解釋出自己為什么在法律的海洋中發(fā)現(xiàn)適用的法律,如何在發(fā)現(xiàn)的刑法條文和案件事實之間搭建起一座橋梁,從而增強判決結論的說服力,排除受眾對法律適用的疑惑；其次,研究刑事裁判規(guī)則的建構有助于法官了解自身的裁判思維,提高司法認知水平。這樣就可以提高自己的元認知水平,而如果我們能夠了解自身的思維運作,就有助于糾正自身裁判過程中存在的問題,提高裁判質(zhì)量；最后,研究刑事裁判規(guī)則的構建有助于法官形成正確的判斷,發(fā)現(xiàn)判決錯誤的根源。讓法官明確自己所建構出的刑事裁判規(guī)則究竟來自什么,是怎么作出的,可以有針對性地對每一個環(huán)節(jié)一一進行查驗,做到心中有數(shù),從而發(fā)現(xiàn)錯誤的根源。 而對于刑事裁判規(guī)則的具體建構過程來說,學術界和審判實務界的研究更是少之又少。有學者認為對于簡單案件來說,法官所發(fā)現(xiàn)的相關法律規(guī)則即是裁判規(guī)則,對于復雜的刑事案件,才需要法官去建構適合個案的刑事裁判規(guī)則。也有學者認為刑事裁判規(guī)則的建構需要法官充分發(fā)揮主觀能動性,反復往返于刑法規(guī)范與案件事實之間,使刑法規(guī)范與案件實相互作用，并對二者反復進行校驗,運用理性知識和經(jīng)驗智慧建構出真正適合刑事案件的裁判規(guī)則。 而對于如何建構刑事裁判規(guī)則,這是本文的寫作重點。本文借助信息加工的研究思路,將其建構路徑分為三個階段：輸入、加工和輸出。事實判斷部分是刑事裁判規(guī)則的輸入階段。這一步將幾種事實進行了梳理,并對各環(huán)節(jié)如何認定進行了細致描述；法的發(fā)現(xiàn)階段是刑事裁判規(guī)則的初步加工階段。法官帶著法感找法,判斷哪個規(guī)范具有最近適合性,同時提出了法官從事法的發(fā)現(xiàn)的啟發(fā)模式,以及具體刑法規(guī)范的發(fā)現(xiàn)過程；法官對所發(fā)現(xiàn)的刑法規(guī)范進行解釋是刑事裁判規(guī)則的深層加工階段。這里的法官解釋一詞是屬技術層面,方法論意義上的,并不是體制意義上的,是法官判案不可或缺的思維活動,具有正當性。并列舉幾種具體的解釋方法,主要是為了說明刑事裁判規(guī)則建構的思維過程,并不重點論述解釋方法自身,故僅選幾個并結合案例進行探討。在進行完上述環(huán)節(jié)后,法官即自然而然的最終得出了案件的判決標準---刑事裁判規(guī)則。
[Abstract]:At present, there are few specialized works in the academic circles and the judicial practice circles to study the rules of the referee, and the definition of the rules of refereeing is not uniform and disagreement. On the basis of the existing research, this article considers that the criminal judgment rule refers to the judge in the specific criminal trial activities. The rules of specific criminal facts are applied to specific criminal cases formed by the construction of the norms of criminal law.
In the process of hearing the criminal case, the main task of the judge is to construct the criminal judgment rules suitable for the case, which requires the judge to display the construction process and construction method of the rules. Therefore, it is of great significance and practical necessity to study the construction of the rules of criminal judgment. First, the study of the construction of the rules of criminal judgment. It helps to enhance the persuasiveness of the conclusion of the judgment. If the judge can show the process of thinking of the rules of the criminal judgment in the referee's document, explain why he found the applicable law in the ocean of the law, how to build a bridge between the criminal provisions and the facts of the case, so as to enhance the persuasion of the conclusion of the judgment. To eliminate the doubts about the application of the law by the audience; secondly, the study of the construction of the rules of criminal judgment helps the judges to understand their own judgment and improve the level of judicial cognition. In this way, they can improve their metacognitive level, and if we can understand their own thinking operation, it will help to correct the questions that exist in the process of self refereeing. In the end, the construction of the rules of the criminal judgment will help the judge to form the correct judgment and find the root of the error of the judgment. To find the root of the mistake.
As for the concrete construction process of the rules of criminal judgment, there are few studies in the academic circle and the judicial practice circle. Some scholars believe that for simple cases, the relevant legal rules found by the judges are the rules of refereeing. For the complex criminal cases, the law officials need to construct the criminal judgment rules suitable for the case. Scholars believe that the construction of the rules of criminal judgment requires the judge to give full play to the subjective initiative, repeat and return to the norms of criminal law and the facts of the case, make the criminal code and case real interaction, and check the two parties repeatedly, and use rational knowledge and experience wisdom to construct the rules of referee which is really suitable for criminal cases.
With the help of the research ideas of information processing, this paper divides its construction path into three stages: input, processing and output. The fact judgment part is the input stage of the rules of criminal judgment. This step is to sort out several facts and how to identify each link. A detailed description; the discovery stage of the law is the preliminary processing stage of the rules of the criminal judgment. The judge takes the law to find the law, and judges which norm has the most recent suitability. At the same time, it puts forward the enlightening mode of the discovery of the judge engaged in the law and the discovery process of the specific criminal code; the judge's interpretation of the criminal code of the criminal law is a criminal discretion. In the deep processing stage of the rule of judgment, the judge's interpretation of a word is a technical level, and it is not in the sense of the system in the sense of the system. It is an indispensable thinking activity of the judge's judgment and is justified. It also lists several specific methods of interpretation, mainly to explain the thinking process of the construction of the rules of criminal judgment, and not to focus on the theory. The interpretation of the method itself, so only a few and combined with case study. After the completion of the above link, the judge will naturally finally get the judgment standard of the case - the rule of criminal judgment.
【學位授予單位】：山東大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D926.2;D925.2

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前4條

1 吳慶寶;;法官裁判的規(guī)范性——以民事法官裁判為視角[J];法律適用;2007年09期

2 鄭永流;法律判斷形成的模式[J];法學研究;2004年01期

3 王安異;;裁判規(guī)范還是行為規(guī)范——對濫用職權罪的功能性考察[J];現(xiàn)代法學;2006年04期

4 陽志平,時勘,王薇;試評覬尼曼經(jīng)濟心理學研究及其影響[J];心理科學;2003年04期

相關重要報紙文章 前1條

1 蔣惠嶺;[N];人民法院報;2005年

相關碩士學位論文 前2條

1 趙耀彤;論裁判規(guī)范[D];山東大學;2006年

2 郭楠楠;論裁判規(guī)范的生成與證成[D];山東大學;2010年

，

本文編號：2057871