法学论坛
法學論罈
법학론단
Legal Forum
2009年
3期
90~95
,共null页
证据 证明限度 诉讼推论 经验法则
證據 證明限度 訴訟推論 經驗法則
증거 증명한도 소송추론 경험법칙
evidence; limitation of proof; litigious inference; generalization of experience
仅根据归纳法的限度否认诉讼推论大前提的确定性，忽视了诉讼证明的特殊性，导致一般经验法则不确定性的因素，在实证科学领域与诉讼认识领域之间是有差别的。凡在程序上不可为法官诉诸感知予以确定的证据命题的真值，均由程序上的言语行为人加以保证，而其讲真话的概率不可赋予精确数值。单个证据的证明值是一种不可赋予精确数值的概率，两个以上证据的综合证明值也是如此。
僅根據歸納法的限度否認訴訟推論大前提的確定性，忽視瞭訴訟證明的特殊性，導緻一般經驗法則不確定性的因素，在實證科學領域與訴訟認識領域之間是有差彆的。凡在程序上不可為法官訴諸感知予以確定的證據命題的真值，均由程序上的言語行為人加以保證，而其講真話的概率不可賦予精確數值。單箇證據的證明值是一種不可賦予精確數值的概率，兩箇以上證據的綜閤證明值也是如此。
부근거귀납법적한도부인소송추론대전제적학정성，홀시료소송증명적특수성，도치일반경험법칙불학정성적인소，재실증과학영역여소송인식영역지간시유차별적。범재정서상불가위법관소제감지여이학정적증거명제적진치，균유정서상적언어행위인가이보증，이기강진화적개솔불가부여정학수치。단개증거적증명치시일충불가부여정학수치적개솔，량개이상증거적종합증명치야시여차。
To deny the certainty of main premise of litigious inference only for the limitation of induction suggests the neglect of speciality of litigious proof. There is a difference between the factors that make uncertain the generalization of experience in the domain of positive science and those in the domain of htigious cognition. The truth of each evidential pwpesition which is unable to be confirmed by the judge by resorting to the sense is to be warranted by the speech- actor in the procedure, but the probability that he tells the truth can not be assigned an accurate figure. The value of proof of single item of evidence is a probability that can not be assigned an accurate figure, and such is the synthetical value of proof of more than two items of evidence.
