重构民事诉讼证明责任—对“法律要件分类说”的反思性检讨

以法律要件分类说为典型的古典证明责任的立足点在于实体法法律规范性质的分析,该理论自提出以来历经德、日民事法学人的沉淀洗练,曾成为学界的通说。但是,法律要件分类说不但在规范分类、间接反证、主观举证责任分类标准等问题上难以理清各种理论纷争,而且其对于动态诉讼过程中当事人举证责任的转换以及与证明标准的关系缺乏必要的关注,也难以与现代民事诉讼的辩论主义、争点整理程序相协调。我国民事证明责任改革应当从"法律要件分类说"的迷思中走出,以"阶段的举证责任论"来重新构建我国的民事证明责任。

Reestablishing the Burden of Proof of Civil Action——Introspective review of "theory of classification of legal requirement"

Classic burden of proof represented by the theory of classification of legal requirement is based on the analysis of the nature of the material law.Since it was put forward,the theory has undergone the precipitation of experts in German and Japan civil law and used to be the general theory of the academic circle.However,the theory not only fails to settle the disputes concerning classification,indirect counterevidence,standards for the classification of the duty of subjective abducing evidence but pays little attention to the shift of the duty of litigant's abducing evidence and the relationship with proof standards during dynamic lawsuit and nor can it coordinate with adversary proceedings or issue arrangement proceedings.Our reform of civil burden of proof should step out of the dilemma of "the theory of classification of legal requirement" and reestablish our civil burden of proof with "the theory of intermediate burden of proof".