举证责任的倒置与分割

On the Reverse and Division of Proving Obligation

在我国现实司法实践中,关于举证责任倒置问题存在着较大的理论分歧。从举证责任倒置规则的渊源的要义来看,在被告承担"总的举证责任"的情况下,被告只是承担其中的一个或两个要件事实的举证责任,相应地,原告仍然需要承担其他三个或者两个要件事实的举证责任做法,是基于司法公平的政策需要。但这可能引起一系列现有理论无法解决的难题。为此,作者提出了特殊诉讼中的举证责任分割理论。其要点是:第一,在法律规定的特殊案件(包括特殊民事案件和特殊刑事案件)中,整个案件的举证责任可以一分为二,即可分割为原告方的举证责任和被告方的举证责任。第二,分割后的两种举证责任是各自独立的。它们之间不可以互相转移。第三,举证责任的分割必须是在特殊的案件中,而且必须是法律或者司法解释明文规定了举证责任倒置的情形。第四,举证责任分割理论的目的是维护诉讼公平原则。

Inour judicial practice at present, there are some different opinions about the problem of special law of burden of proof. Author look back to their opinions and its backgrounds. Author says that, according to the main spirits of special law of burden of proof, to meet the need of equal judicial policy, defendant has the burden of proof about one or two key facts under the conditions of that defendant is responsible for '' total burden of proof'', in the meantime, plaintiff is responsible for the burden of proof about other key facts.But this may lead to a series problem which can not be resolved by our present theories. Author gives rise to his opinions of cutting one burden of proof into two in the special case. Its main contents includes that, firstly, in the special case made by law, the burden of proof may be cut into two( there are part burden of proof is carried by plaintiff and part burden of proof is carried by defendant ) . Secondly, the two burdens are not translated from one side to other side. Thirdly, the two conditions must be noticed that, the cut active must be carried in the special case and made in the law. Fourth, the aim of cutting is to protect the equal suit.