论文部分内容阅读
一一说到举证责任,人们就会自然而然地想到打官司。而一说起打官司,事实上也就是打证据。因为案件的事实发生在过去,具有不可逆性,谁也无法让它重演一遍。既然无法再现,而身为法官又必须对案件中的是非曲直、有罪无罪做出评判,其依据就只能是能够展现在眼前的各种各样的证据,只能从“历史遗留的碎片”去拼凑和推断案件的事实。因此,如何合理分配举证责任,就成了至关重要的问题。因为负有举证责任的一方,如果不能提供充足的证据或举证不能,相应地,他就必须承担败诉的后果。
One by one talking about the burden of proof, people will naturally think of litigation. When it comes to litigation, in fact, it is evidence. Because the facts of the case happened in the past, irreversible, no one can make it repeat it again. Since it can not be reappeared, as a judge, it is necessary to judge the merits and guiltlessness of the case, and the basis can only be a variety of evidence that can be displayed in front of us only from the historical legacy Debris "to put together and infer the facts of the case. Therefore, how to rationally allocate the burden of proof has become a crucial issue. Because the party with the burden of proof can not provide sufficient evidence or proof can not, accordingly, he must bear the consequences of losing the case.