日本二审法院如何审查裁判员认定的事实——以日本最高法院2012年2月13日判决为例

How the Japanese Court of Second Instance Examines the Facts Determined by the Referee:Taking the Decision of the Supreme Court of Japan on 13 February 2012 as an Example

日本在引入裁判员制度时未修改上诉制度的相关规定。随后,日本最高法院于2012年2月13日做出判决,强调刑事二审程序应采用事后审制,应当参照“经验法则、逻辑法则违反说”标准审查裁判员参审下第一审程序认定的事实,并对《刑事诉讼法》第382条规定的“事实误认”这一上诉理由的内涵做出一般性解释。通过考察日本裁判员制度实施后刑事二审程序审查方式的变化,可以发现,陪审制度与上诉制度之间存在相互促进的作用力,但由于我国人民陪审员制度的基础理论尚未得到简明论述、司法功能发挥不顺畅、上诉审审判模式定位缺失,这种作用力在我国相当微弱。人民陪审员制度的未来改革方向应当是大力发展人民陪审员制度的基础理论,整合司法改革各项措施,构建陪审员参审刑事案件大合议庭事实认定程序。

When Japan introduced the referee system, it did not modify the relevant provisions of the appeal system. Subsequently, on 13 February 2012, the Supreme Court of Japan issued a judgment, emphasizing that the criminal second instance procedure should adopt the system of ex post facto trial, and that the facts determined by the first instance procedure under the participation of referees should be examined with reference to the standard of “violating the rules of experience and logic”. It also gives a general explanation of the connotation of the appeal reason of “factual error” stipulated in Article 382 of the Criminal procedure Law. Through the investigation of the changes in the examination mode of the criminal second instance procedure after the implementation of the Japanese referee system, we can find that there is a mutually reinforcing force between the jury system and the appeal system. However, because the basic theory of the people’s jury system in our country has not been briefly discussed, the judicial function is not smooth, and the appellate trial mode is lack of positioning, this force is very weak in our country. The future reform direction of the people’s jury system should be to vigorously develop the basic theory of the people’ s jury system, integrate various measures of judicial reform, and construct the procedure of finding the facts of the large collegial panel of jurors participating in the trial of criminal cases.