论文部分内容阅读
参照指导性案例可以被理解为通过适用指导性案例进行规范性命题的证成,这既包括对指导性案例与待决案件相关相似性的逻辑判断,也包括对指导性案例与待决案件决定相似性的实质论证。这一法律论证过程为对指导性案例各构成要素的整体性参照,以裁判要点作为认识起点,以事实比对作为关键环节,以实质理由的确定与权衡作为决定要素。在指导性案例的构成要素中,只有裁判要点具备在判决理由中进行援引的资格,裁判要点之所以可被援引,在于通过案例指导制度所赋予它的权威性进行外部保障,以支持裁判要点的实质理由的说服力作为内在理据。
Reference Guiding Cases can be understood as demonstrating normative propositions by applying Guiding Cases, which include both logical judgments on similarities between Guiding Cases and Pending Cases, as well as on Guiding Cases and Pending Cases The substantive argument of similarity. This process of legal argumentation is a holistic reference to each constituent element of the guiding case, taking the point of referee as the starting point of cognition, the factual comparison as the key link, and the determination and weighing of substantive reasons as the decisive elements. Only the referee points have the qualifications to be invoked in the reasons for the referendum. The reason why the referee points can be invoked is the external guarantee given by the case guidance system to support its authority in order to support the referee points Persuasion of substantive reasons as the intrinsic reason.