本文關(guān)鍵詞： 交通事故責(zé)任認(rèn)定 可訴性 具體行政行為 受案范圍　出處：《大連海事大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：如今交通事故已經(jīng)成為造成人類非正常死亡的重要原因之一,交通事故不僅給國家和人民造成嚴(yán)重?fù)p失,也給許多家庭帶來了痛苦和不幸,而且影響著社會(huì)的穩(wěn)定。正常的交通秩序遭到破壞,使得交通運(yùn)輸受阻,從而影著國民經(jīng)濟(jì)持續(xù)健康發(fā)展。因此如何妥善處理交通事故問題成了全社會(huì)關(guān)注的熱點(diǎn)問題。 根據(jù)現(xiàn)行法律的相關(guān)規(guī)定,目前交通事故責(zé)任認(rèn)定行為在我國司法實(shí)踐中不具有可訴性。公安機(jī)關(guān)交通管理部門對(duì)事故現(xiàn)場(chǎng)勘驗(yàn)、檢查后出具的交通事故認(rèn)定書在訴訟中作為證據(jù)使用。當(dāng)事人對(duì)交通事故責(zé)任認(rèn)定行為不服只能向上一級(jí)公安機(jī)關(guān)交通管理部門申請(qǐng)重新鑒定,除此之外沒有其他救濟(jì)途徑。支持交通事故責(zé)任認(rèn)定行為不具有可訴性的觀點(diǎn)認(rèn)為：交通事故責(zé)任認(rèn)定行為只是一種中間性行政行為,或者說是一種不會(huì)直接涉及到當(dāng)事人利益的行政確認(rèn)行為。但事實(shí)上,交通事故責(zé)任認(rèn)定是對(duì)交通事故現(xiàn)場(chǎng)處置以及事故調(diào)查的綜合分析,而且與由交通事故產(chǎn)生的民事責(zé)任、行政責(zé)任甚至是刑事責(zé)任都有直接關(guān)系。在這種涉及當(dāng)事人權(quán)利義務(wù)的情形之下,實(shí)踐中卻不能給予合法有效的制度保障,與行政法保障公民權(quán)益的理念不相符,與當(dāng)前我國立法精神相違背。 本文共分為五個(gè)部分。第一部分主要對(duì)交通事故責(zé)任認(rèn)定行為的相關(guān)概念和基本情況作簡(jiǎn)要分析。第二部分在劃分行政行為的基礎(chǔ)上詳細(xì)論述具體行政行為的屬性,并將交通事故責(zé)任認(rèn)定行為放在具體行政行為的概念下進(jìn)行比較分析得出交通事故責(zé)任認(rèn)定行為屬于具體行政行為而非所謂的證據(jù)行為的結(jié)論,奠定交通事故責(zé)任認(rèn)定行為可訴性的基礎(chǔ)。第三部分通過分析行政訴訟法受案范圍以及受案范圍的確定標(biāo)準(zhǔn),指出交通事故責(zé)任認(rèn)定行為會(huì)直接涉及到事故當(dāng)事人的利益,因此必須將其納入行政訴訟受案范圍內(nèi)。在第三部分,筆者詳細(xì)論述了交通事故責(zé)任認(rèn)定行為如何讓影響事故當(dāng)事人的民事、行政和刑事責(zé)任。第四部分通過分析對(duì)交通事故責(zé)任認(rèn)定不服時(shí)救濟(jì)方式的不完善這一現(xiàn)實(shí)問題,來說明通過法律規(guī)定的方式確認(rèn)交通事故責(zé)任認(rèn)定行為可訴性的必要性。第五部分對(duì)可訴性實(shí)現(xiàn)途徑的闡述,論證明確交通事故責(zé)任認(rèn)定行為可訴性可行性與必要性。
[Abstract]:Today, traffic accidents have become one of the important causes of human deaths. Traffic accidents not only cause serious losses to the country and people, but also bring pain and misfortune to many families. It also affects the stability of the society, the normal traffic order is destroyed, the traffic transportation is blocked, and the national economy continues to develop healthily, so how to deal with the traffic accident problem properly has become a hot issue that the whole society pays close attention to. According to the relevant provisions of the current law, at present, the cognizance of traffic accident liability is not actionable in the judicial practice of our country. The traffic management department of the public security organ conducts an investigation on the scene of the accident. The traffic accident cognizance document issued after inspection is used as evidence in the lawsuit. The parties who are not satisfied with the act of determining the responsibility of the traffic accident can only apply for a new appraisal by the traffic administrative department of the public security organ at the next higher level. In addition, there is no other way of relief. The view that supporting the identification of traffic accident liability is not actionable is that the identification of traffic accident liability is only a kind of intermediate administrative act. Or it is an act of administrative confirmation that does not directly involve the interests of the parties concerned. But in fact, the determination of traffic accident liability is a comprehensive analysis of the disposal of the traffic accident site and the investigation of the accident, and it is also related to the civil liability arising from the traffic accident. There is a direct relationship between administrative liability and even criminal liability. In this case involving the rights and obligations of the parties concerned, the legal and effective system protection cannot be given in practice, which is inconsistent with the idea of protecting the rights and interests of citizens in administrative law. Against the spirit of our current legislation. This article is divided into five parts. The first part mainly analyzes the related concepts and basic situation of the traffic accident responsibility cognizance behavior. The second part discusses the attribute of the concrete administrative act in detail on the basis of dividing the administrative act. The conclusion that the identification of traffic accident responsibility belongs to the specific administrative act rather than the so-called evidential behavior is compared and analyzed under the concept of the specific administrative act, and the conclusion is drawn that the traffic accident responsibility cognizance act belongs to the specific administrative act rather than the so-called evidential act. The third part points out that the identification of responsibility for traffic accidents will directly involve the interests of the parties concerned by analyzing the scope of the cases and the criteria for determining the scope of the cases. Therefore, it must be brought into the scope of administrative litigation cases. In the third part, the author discusses in detail how the act of determining the responsibility of traffic accidents can affect the civil affairs of the parties involved in the accident. Administrative and criminal liability. Part 4th through the analysis of the actual problem of the imperfection of relief methods when the responsibility for traffic accidents is found to be dissatisfied, To explain the necessity of confirming the actionable behavior of traffic accident liability by means of law. Part 5th expounds the way of realizing actionable responsibility and demonstrates the feasibility and necessity of confirming the actionable behavior of traffic accident responsibility.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：大連海事大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D925.3;D922.14
，

本文編號(hào)：1524575