本文選題：撤回起訴 + 禁止再訴��； 參考：《湘潭大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：撤訴是原告向法院做出的旨在撤回已成立之訴,要求法院對(duì)案件停止審理的訴訟行為。二審撤回起訴作為撤訴制度的重要組成部分,是原審原告行使處分權(quán)的重要方式。然剖析我國(guó)民事訴訟撤訴制度的立法現(xiàn)狀,不難發(fā)現(xiàn),關(guān)于撤訴制度的規(guī)定一直未有太大變化,對(duì)二審撤回起訴問(wèn)題的規(guī)定更是十分模糊。在司法實(shí)踐中,法官的處理方式也是五花八門,導(dǎo)致了實(shí)務(wù)中的亂象。鑒于此,2015年2月4日出臺(tái)實(shí)施的《最高人民法院關(guān)于適用〈中華人民共和國(guó)民事訴訟法〉的解釋》第338條明確規(guī)定在二審程序中原審原告可以撤回起訴,賦予了原審原告在二審中撤回起訴的權(quán)利,不僅在立法上彌補(bǔ)了民事訴訟法的漏洞,對(duì)解決司法實(shí)務(wù)中二審撤回起訴處理不統(tǒng)一的問(wèn)題也具有重大意義。當(dāng)然,在肯定立法進(jìn)步的同時(shí)也應(yīng)注意到該制度背后所產(chǎn)生的新的問(wèn)題,如二審法院同時(shí)準(zhǔn)許原審原告撤回起訴和撤回上訴的申請(qǐng)時(shí),一審判決失效與生效的矛盾;其他當(dāng)事人許可同意方式不明可能導(dǎo)致訴訟拖延、處理不統(tǒng)一;“可以準(zhǔn)許”的規(guī)定違背二審撤回起訴制度設(shè)立的初衷;對(duì)當(dāng)事人撤訴后再訴徹底禁止不合理等問(wèn)題,仍需進(jìn)一步完善。本文筆者首先從民事二審撤回起訴制度的內(nèi)涵入手,歸納了學(xué)術(shù)界對(duì)于民事二審撤回起訴制度的不同定義,并對(duì)這些概念進(jìn)行對(duì)比分析,得出本文中二審撤回起訴的內(nèi)涵。在界定概念的基礎(chǔ)上,對(duì)二審撤回起訴制度的立法目的、要件及法律效果進(jìn)行了分析,進(jìn)而將其與一審撤訴、撤回上訴進(jìn)行了比較,以深化對(duì)該制度的理解與認(rèn)識(shí)。其次,從立法和司法兩方面對(duì)我國(guó)二審撤回起訴制度進(jìn)行了深入挖掘,指出了該制度在現(xiàn)階段存在的諸多不足,如一刀切式地禁止再訴缺乏合理性、其他當(dāng)事人許可同意的方式不明確、訴訟費(fèi)用的負(fù)擔(dān)主體混亂、缺乏程序性制裁措施等。最后,在借鑒域外國(guó)家撤訴制度中相關(guān)經(jīng)驗(yàn)(撤訴期限、法律效果、被告同意的方式等)的基礎(chǔ)上結(jié)合我國(guó)的司法實(shí)踐情況,提出了完善我國(guó)二審撤回起訴制度,應(yīng)在堅(jiān)持處分權(quán)、當(dāng)事人訴訟權(quán)利平等和訴訟效益原則的前提下,明確法院處理方式、細(xì)化其他當(dāng)事人許可同意的規(guī)定、確立違反二審撤回起訴制度的程序性制裁措施、規(guī)定原告為訴訟費(fèi)用的負(fù)擔(dān)主體、對(duì)二審撤回起訴后再訴進(jìn)行例外規(guī)定等完善建議。
[Abstract]:Withdrawal is the action that the plaintiff makes to the court to withdraw the established action and request the court to stop hearing the case. As an important part of the withdrawal system, the second instance withdrawal of prosecution is an important way for the plaintiff to exercise the right of disposition. However, it is not difficult to find that there has been no great change in the provisions of the withdrawal system of civil action in our country, and the provisions on the withdrawal of prosecution in the second instance are even more vague. In judicial practice, the judge's handling is also varied, resulting in chaos in practice. In view of this, Article 338 of the interpretation of the Supreme people's Court on the Application of the Civil procedure Law of the people's Republic of China, promulgated on February 4, 2015, explicitly stipulates that the plaintiff of the original trial may withdraw his suit during the second instance procedure. It gives the plaintiff the right to withdraw the lawsuit in the second instance, which not only makes up the loophole of the civil procedure law in legislation, but also has great significance to solve the problem of the disunity of the second instance withdrawing the prosecution in the judicial practice. Of course, while affirming the legislative progress, we should also pay attention to the new problems behind the system, such as the contradiction between invalidation and validity of the first-instance judgment when the court of second instance simultaneously allows the plaintiff to withdraw the suit and withdraw the application of appeal; The lack of permission and consent of other parties may lead to delay in litigation and inconsistent handling; the provisions of "may permit" run counter to the original intention of the second instance to withdraw the prosecution system; and it is unreasonable to prohibit the parties' withdrawal of the suit after the appeal has been withdrawn completely, and so on. It still needs further improvement. The author begins with the connotation of the civil second instance withdrawing prosecution system, summarizes the different definitions of the civil second instance withdrawal prosecution system in the academic circles, and makes a comparative analysis of these concepts, and draws the connotation of the second instance withdrawal prosecution in this paper. On the basis of defining the concept, this paper analyzes the legislative purpose, the elements and the legal effect of the second instance withdrawal of prosecution system, and then compares it with the first instance withdrawal of suit and the withdrawal of appeal in order to deepen the understanding and understanding of the system. Secondly, from the aspects of legislation and judicature, the author deeply excavates the system of withdrawing the prosecution of second instance in our country, and points out many shortcomings of this system at the present stage, such as the lack of rationality of prohibiting resuit in a one-size-fits-all manner. Other parties' consent is unclear, the burden of litigation costs is confused, and procedural sanctions are lacking. Finally, on the basis of drawing lessons from the relevant experiences in the system of withdrawal of foreign countries (deadline of withdrawal, legal effect, manner of consent of the defendant, etc.), this paper proposes to perfect the system of withdrawing the prosecution of second instance in our country, based on the judicial practice of our country. On the premise of adhering to the principles of disposition right, equal litigant rights and benefit of litigation, we should clarify the way of court handling, refine the provisions of permission and consent of other parties, and establish procedural sanction measures that violate the system of withdrawing litigation in second instance. It is suggested that the plaintiff should be the main burden of litigation costs, and the exception should be made to the second instance after withdrawing the lawsuit.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D925.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張艷;;民事上訴審撤回起訴規(guī)則的解釋論[J];華東政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2016年06期

2 林劍鋒;;設(shè)定與限制:論民事上訴審中的撤訴[J];中外法學(xué);2015年03期

3 陳小潔;;中國(guó)傳統(tǒng)司法判例情理表達(dá)的方式——以《刑案匯覽》中裁判依據(jù)的選取為視角[J];政法論壇;2015年03期

4 李相波;;關(guān)于《民事訴訟法》司法解釋第二審程序修改內(nèi)容的理解與適用[J];法律適用;2015年04期

5 李磊;羅海;;原告上訴后在二審期間可申請(qǐng)撤回起訴[J];人民司法;2015年04期

6 王勇;;二審撤訴的處理之道——從“吳梅案”切入[J];湖北警官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2013年10期

7 曾耀林;王長(zhǎng)軍;何瑤;;二審中經(jīng)雙方當(dāng)事人同意,原審原告的起訴可與上訴人的上訴一并撤回[J];人民司法;2013年08期

8 周曉霞;;論民事終局判決效力確定時(shí)間[J];西部法學(xué)評(píng)論;2012年02期

9 劉學(xué)在;;民事上訴審程序中亟待完善的問(wèn)題之思考[J];河南財(cái)經(jīng)政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2012年01期

10 石珍;曾令抄;;論民事二審程序中原告撤訴權(quán)的司法適用——兼與李海濤法官商榷[J];成都理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年06期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 朱建敏;民事訴訟請(qǐng)求研究[D];武漢大學(xué);2010年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 吳春霞;民事撤回起訴制度研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2016年

2 鐘礦星;論我國(guó)民事二審程序中原審原告的撤回起訴權(quán)[D];西南政法大學(xué);2014年

3 李仕英;二審是否可以撤回起訴的問(wèn)題研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號(hào)：1876103