刑事裁判文书说理的基本要求与理想模式——基于三则改判案件的经验考察

The Basic Requirement and Ideal Model of Criminal Adjudication Reasoning——Based on the Experience of Three Cases of Commutation

刑事案件的说理关乎司法公信力,对于避免错判具有重要作用。比照聂树斌案、于欢案、长春“孙氏三兄弟”案三则刑事改判案件的二审或再审判决与原审判决在说理层面的差异可知,刑事裁判文书说理需满足不同层次的要求,即说理的基本要求和可资追求的理想模式。裁判文书说理的基本要求是满足法理和事理:对法理的说理必须紧紧围绕犯罪构成要件展开;对事理的说理必须围绕关键事实展开,且对证据的说理需要综合各种方法排除合理怀疑。同时,刑事裁判文书说理存在理想模式和应该努力的方向,即在满足刑事裁判文书说理基本要求的前提下,鼓励法官发挥能动性。一方面,通过加强学理、文理以及类似案件等实质性依据的综合运用,平衡说理的规范化与多样性之间的关系;另一方面,借助文理加强说理的修辞,增强说理的真实性和实质化。以实现法律效果与社会效果的统一为终极目标进行说理,有助于实现释法说理之宗旨。

The reasoning of criminal cases concerns judicial credibility,which undoubtedly plays an important role in avoiding wrong judgment.This paper starts with three cases Nie Shubin,Yu Huan and Changchun Brothers,and aim to analyze the differ⁃ences between the judgment of the second trial or retrial and the judgment of the original trial in the level of reasoning,and pro⁃poses that there should be basic requirements and ideal models for the reasoning of criminal judgment documents.The basic re⁃quirements for the reasoning of criminal judgment documents are that they should meet the principle of matter and the principle of law.The points lie in:the reasoning of law must be carried out closely around the constitutive elements of crime;the reasoning of facts must be carried out closely around the key facts;the reasoning of proof requires a combination of methods beyond reason⁃able doubt.On the basis of meeting the minimum standard,the ideal mode of reasoning in judgment documents requires judges to strengthen the application of substantive basis(including academic views,basic knowledge and similar cases),improve rhetori⁃cal ability to enhance the authenticity of reasoning,and strive to realize the unification of legal effect and social effect to realize the purpose of interpretation and reasoning.