论文部分内容阅读
新修改的刑诉法确定了申请方在违法所得没收程序中的证明责任主要是犯罪事实与违法所得。申请方对犯罪事实的证明责任集中于犯罪构成要件中的客体和客观方面,对违法所得的证明则有犯罪直接所得和间接所得之分。在美国民事没收制度中,法律将无辜物主利益区分为表面的和法律的利益,并对无辜物主的法律利益进一步细分为先存利益和后得利益,在不同的利益主张中,无辜物主的证明责任不尽相同。美国民事没收中关于无辜物主的证明责任为我国违法所得没收程序中利害关系人之证明责任构建提供了丰富的、可资借鉴的经验。
The newly revised Criminal Procedure Law established that the burden of proof on the part of the claimant in the forfeiture of unlawful proceeds is mainly criminal facts and illegal gains. The burden of proof on the facts of the crime by the claimant is concentrated on the objective and objective aspects of the constitutional elements of the crime. The proof of the illegal gains includes the direct and indirect proceeds of crime. In the system of civil confiscation in the United States, the law divides the interests of innocent owners into superficial and legal interests, and further divides the legal interests of innocent owners into preexisting interests and post-gains interests. In different claims, innocent people The owner’s burden of proof varies. The burden of proof on innocent owners in the civil confiscation of the United States provides a wealth of lessons for the construction of the burden of proof for the interested parties in the forfeiture of illegal proceeds.