本文選題：民事訴訟 + 證據(jù)��； 參考：《中國(guó)政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：民事訴訟當(dāng)事人收集證據(jù)是指在民事訴訟中,當(dāng)事人為查明或證明待定的事實(shí),運(yùn)用適當(dāng)?shù)姆椒ㄈふ�、發(fā)現(xiàn)、獲取各種證據(jù)材料的一種訴訟活動(dòng)。它是當(dāng)事人行使證明權(quán)的一種方式。1991年的《民事訴訟法》首次對(duì)當(dāng)事人的收集證據(jù)權(quán)進(jìn)行了規(guī)定,即“當(dāng)事人有權(quán)委托代理人,提出回避申請(qǐng),收集、提供證據(jù),進(jìn)行辯論,請(qǐng)求調(diào)解,提起上訴,中請(qǐng)執(zhí)行。”但對(duì)于當(dāng)事人在收集證據(jù)時(shí)具體可以采用的方法,相關(guān)法律在語(yǔ)言上對(duì)其表述地比較原則,在體系上對(duì)其規(guī)定地相 當(dāng)混亂。 從法條數(shù)量上看,規(guī)定收集證據(jù)的條文,在證據(jù)的條文總數(shù)中所占比重較低�！睹袷略V訟法》中涉及證據(jù)一詞的地方有20條30處,直接涉及當(dāng)事人收集證據(jù)的字眼只有1處；《證據(jù)規(guī)定》共83條,只有26條與收集證據(jù)有關(guān),在這26條規(guī)定中,大部分是關(guān)于法院調(diào)查取證的描述,在當(dāng)事人如何收集證據(jù)方面只有原則性的粗略規(guī)定。從完整性上看,我國(guó)當(dāng)前的收集證據(jù)制度沒(méi)有規(guī)定取證對(duì)象拒絕作證的法律后果,也即對(duì)于取證主體的取證權(quán)沒(méi)有法律威懾力作后盾。從體系上來(lái)看,申請(qǐng)人民法院調(diào)查收集證據(jù)、申請(qǐng)鑒定、證據(jù)交換這些收集證據(jù)方法是在證據(jù)一章中加以規(guī)定的,而查閱、復(fù)制卷宗材料這種收集證據(jù)方法卻被規(guī)定在訴訟參加人一章中。由此可以看出現(xiàn)行的收集證據(jù)制度內(nèi)容之不健全,體系之紊亂。這也就使收集證據(jù)權(quán)論為一種權(quán)利的招牌,造成實(shí)踐中取證難、取證亂的現(xiàn)象。 對(duì)我國(guó)收集證據(jù)制度進(jìn)行反思和完善,改變當(dāng)事人收集證據(jù)手段的貧乏現(xiàn)狀已成為當(dāng)前亟待解決的問(wèn)題。本文中,筆者主要運(yùn)用了規(guī)范分析,歷史考察,比較分析,體系分析等方法對(duì)收集證據(jù)制度加以研究。 本文主要由引言、正文、結(jié)論三部分組成。正文分為四章： 第一章分析了當(dāng)事人收集證據(jù)行為的含義和性質(zhì),指出當(dāng)事人收集證據(jù)是一種權(quán)利而不是義務(wù)或者責(zé)任,辨析了其與相關(guān)證據(jù)制度的關(guān)系。 第二章分析了我國(guó)當(dāng)事人收集證據(jù)制度的歷史沿革和現(xiàn)狀。將我國(guó)民事收集證據(jù)制度的演變分為三個(gè)時(shí)段,分析了收集證據(jù)制度的發(fā)展,從宏觀和微觀兩個(gè)層面剖析了目前仍然存在的問(wèn)題,并對(duì)造成現(xiàn)有問(wèn)題的原因進(jìn)行了法理層面的分析。 第三章是采用比較法的方法分析了兩大法系主要國(guó)家的收集證據(jù)制度,并對(duì)其各自的特點(diǎn)進(jìn)行了評(píng)價(jià),總結(jié)了其中的立法經(jīng)驗(yàn)。 第四章從完善當(dāng)事人收集證據(jù)的具體方法、建立當(dāng)事人收集證據(jù)的保障體系兩個(gè)方面,提出了完善我國(guó)民事訴訟當(dāng)事人收集證據(jù)制度的構(gòu)想。筆者認(rèn)為,完善當(dāng)事人收集證據(jù)的具體方法應(yīng)當(dāng)包括完善當(dāng)事人陳述收集制度、建立實(shí)物證據(jù)強(qiáng)制提出命令制度、完善證人證言收集制度三個(gè)方面。當(dāng)事人收集證據(jù)的保障體系包括觀念革新,取證主體的保障措施,取證對(duì)象的保障措施三方面,并結(jié)合證明責(zé)任、證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)行了論述。 本文的創(chuàng)新點(diǎn)有三：第一,對(duì)收集證據(jù)行為的性質(zhì)分析。關(guān)于當(dāng)事人收集證據(jù)行為的性質(zhì)探討,主要解決的是收集證據(jù)行為對(duì)于收集證據(jù)主體而言,是一項(xiàng)能夠?qū)κ占C據(jù)對(duì)象獨(dú)立行使的強(qiáng)制力量,還是為完成舉證責(zé)任而不得不為之的義務(wù),抑或是一種可以自由支配的行為資格。對(duì)收集證據(jù)行為性質(zhì)的界定直接關(guān)乎法律對(duì)收集證據(jù)制度的規(guī)定。筆者認(rèn)為,強(qiáng)調(diào)收集證據(jù)行為的權(quán)利性質(zhì),會(huì)引導(dǎo)在設(shè)置收集證據(jù)制度時(shí)將重點(diǎn)放在當(dāng)事人收集證據(jù)手段的擴(kuò)充上,而不是一味地強(qiáng)調(diào)收集證據(jù)應(yīng)該遵循的規(guī)范。第二,將收集證據(jù)制度與其他證據(jù)制度進(jìn)行比較。收集證據(jù)制度不是一個(gè)孤立的存在,它與其他證據(jù)制度有著緊密的聯(lián)系,尤其是與證明責(zé)任和證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。目前收集證據(jù)制度從宏觀上來(lái)看,與證明責(zé)任、證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的有關(guān)規(guī)定相沖突。完善當(dāng)事人收集證據(jù)制度,不僅可以從收集證據(jù)方法入手,還可以結(jié)合證明責(zé)任和證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn),來(lái)緩解當(dāng)事人收集證據(jù)的壓力。第三,有關(guān)收集證據(jù)制度完善的方法。筆者比較看重當(dāng)事人陳述和證人證言這類(lèi)言辭證據(jù)的收集。當(dāng)事人陳述包含了大量的信息,對(duì)于查明事實(shí)具有重大的作用。很多國(guó)家都規(guī)定了當(dāng)事人陳述此類(lèi)證據(jù)的收集。在我國(guó),當(dāng)事人陳述雖然也作為一種獨(dú)立的證據(jù)形式,但是法律并沒(méi)有規(guī)定如何收集此類(lèi)證據(jù)。筆者認(rèn)為,可以建立一個(gè)當(dāng)事人互相詢(xún)問(wèn)的程序,通過(guò)此程序打開(kāi)收集證據(jù)的大門(mén),為當(dāng)事人收集更多的證據(jù)指明方向。關(guān)于證人證言的收集,很多著作都將重點(diǎn)放在如何規(guī)范證人出庭作證方面,但筆者認(rèn)為,證人出庭作證并不屬于收集證據(jù),而屬于庭審中的質(zhì)證環(huán)節(jié),對(duì)于證人證言的收集應(yīng)該在庭前進(jìn)行,可以通過(guò)筆錄證言的方式收集。
[Abstract]:The parties to collect evidence in civil litigation refers to a litigation activity in which the parties seek, find, and obtain all kinds of evidence in order to find out or prove the undetermined facts in civil proceedings. It is a way for the parties to exercise the right of proof for the first time, the Civil Procedure Law of.1991, for the first time to collect evidence of the parties. It has been stipulated that "the party has the right to entrust an agent, put forward an application for avoidance, collect, provide evidence, debate, ask for mediation, and bring an appeal, please execute it." but the law can be used in the collection of evidence, and the relevant laws are in the language to compare the principles and to the system.
When chaos.
In terms of the number of laws, the provisions for the collection of evidence are relatively low in the total number of articles in the evidence. There are 20 places and 30 places in the "Civil Procedure Law" involving evidence, directly involving only 1 words for the parties to collect evidence; < < evidence > > there are 83 articles, and only 26 are related to the collection of evidence. In these 26 provisions, the majority of the provisions are in the majority. It is about the description of the court investigation and forensics, and there is only a rough rule on how the parties collect evidence. In terms of integrity, the current collection evidence system in our country does not stipulate the legal consequences of the refusal to testify by the object of evidence, that is, there is no legal deterrent to the evidence right of the subject of evidence. The people's court asks the people's court to investigate and collect evidence, to apply for identification, and to exchange these methods of collecting evidence in the chapter of evidence, and the method of collecting evidence for the collection of files is stipulated in the chapter of the litigant participants. Thus, it can be seen that the current collection of evidence system is not perfect and the system is disorganized. The right to collect evidence is regarded as a sign of rights, which leads to the difficulty of obtaining evidence and the confusion of evidence collection in practice.
To reflect and improve the collection of evidence system in China, changing the poor status of the parties to collect evidence has become an urgent problem to be solved. In this paper, the author mainly uses the methods of normative analysis, historical investigation, comparative analysis, system analysis and other methods to study the collection of evidence.
This paper is mainly composed of three parts: introduction, text and conclusion. The text is divided into four chapters.
The first chapter analyzes the meaning and nature of the party's collection of evidence, and points out that the party's collection of evidence is a right, not the obligation or responsibility, and the relationship between the parties and the relevant evidence system.
The second chapter analyzes the historical evolution and present situation of the party collecting evidence system in China. It divides the evolution of the civil evidence collection system into three periods, analyzes the development of the evidence collection system, and analyses the existing problems from the macro and micro levels in two levels, and carries out the legal level of the reasons for the existing problems. Analysis.
The third chapter is to analyze the collection evidence system of the main countries of the two legal systems by comparative method, and evaluate their respective characteristics, and summarize the legislative experience.
The fourth chapter, from the two aspects of perfecting the concrete methods of collecting evidence by the parties and establishing the guarantee system for the parties to collect evidence, puts forward the idea of improving the collection of evidence system by the civil litigants in our country. The author holds that the concrete methods for improving the parties' collection of evidence should include the perfection of the parties' statement and collection system and the establishment of physical evidence. It is mandatory to put forward the order system and improve the system of witness testimony collection. The protection system of the evidence collection of the parties includes the innovation of ideas, the safeguard measures of the subject of evidence, the three aspects of the guarantee measures of the object of evidence, and the proof of the burden of proof, and the proof of the standard has been proved.
The innovation points of this article are three: first, the nature of the behavior of collecting evidence is analyzed. The nature of the behavior of the parties to collect evidence is discussed. The main solution is to collect evidence for the collection of evidence subject, which is a compulsory force for the independent exercise of the object of evidence collection, or for the completion of the burden of proof. The definition of the nature of the collection of evidence is directly related to the provisions of the law on the collection of evidence. The author holds that the emphasis on the nature of the right to collect evidence will lead to the expansion of the parties' collection of evidence in the collection of evidence system, rather than the expansion of the means of evidence collection by the parties. Second, compare the collection of evidence system with other evidence systems. The collection of evidence is not an isolated existence, it has a close connection with other evidence systems, especially the burden of proof and the standard of proof. At present, the collection of evidence system from the macro perspective, and the burden of proof. In order to improve the parties' collection of evidence system, the parties can not only start with the collection of evidence methods, but also combine the burden of proof and the standard of proof to alleviate the pressure on the parties to collect evidence. Third, the methods to improve the collection of evidence system. The author pays more attention to the parties' statement and witness testimony. The parties' statement contains a large amount of information, which has a significant role to identify the facts. Many countries have stipulated the parties' collection of such evidence. In our country, the parties' statements are also an independent form of evidence, but the law does not stipulate how to collect such evidence. In order to establish a procedure for the mutual inquiries of the parties, this procedure opens the door to the collection of evidence and collects more evidence for the parties. On the collection of witness testimony, many of the books will focus on how to standardize the testimony of witnesses, but the author believes that the testimony of the witness does not belong to the collection of evidence, but it belongs to the witness. The collection of witnesses' testimony should be carried out before the court in the cross examination section of the trial, and can be collected through written testimony.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國(guó)政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D925.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 周成泓;;論民事訴訟中的摸索證明[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2008年04期

2 杜聞;;英美民事證據(jù)開(kāi)示若干問(wèn)題研析[J];證據(jù)科學(xué);2008年06期

3 韓波;;論證據(jù)收集力強(qiáng)弱與證明責(zé)任輕重[J];證據(jù)科學(xué);2009年02期

4 吳丹紅,孫孝福;論誘惑偵查[J];法商研究(中南政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2001年04期

5 劉榮軍;論證人的證言拒絕權(quán)[J];法學(xué);1999年05期

6 李昕;;德、日兩國(guó)民事證據(jù)收集制度及其對(duì)我國(guó)的啟示[J];昆明理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2009年01期

7 吳如巧;;離婚損害賠償訴訟無(wú)過(guò)錯(cuò)女性“舉證難”之破解——兼論“私人偵探”在我國(guó)的可行性[J];昆明理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2009年03期

8 劉春梅;完善我國(guó)證據(jù)收集制度的若干思考——日本證據(jù)收集制度及啟示[J];河南省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2001年06期

9 肖建華;石達(dá)理;;日本民事訴訟訴前證據(jù)收集制度研究及其借鑒[J];河南省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年01期

10 唐力;;日本民事訴訟證據(jù)收集制度及其法理[J];環(huán)球法律評(píng)論;2007年02期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 于鵬;民事訴訟證明妨礙研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號(hào)：1796872