CAJ | 학술논문

案件事实的形成在构成要件符合性判断中处于核心位置。司法实践对案件事实的形成存在诸多误区,使得刑法规范与案件事实难以恰如其分地对应。案件事实的形成应该以刑法规范为指导。对于案件事实,既要全面评价,又要禁止重复评价。当案件存在合理怀疑时,应该做出对被告人有利的裁决。在方法上应该坚持类型思维的方法,注重类比推理,同时应该正确适用举轻以明重、举重以明轻的方法。
안건사실적형성재구성요건부합성판단중처우핵심위치。사법실천대안건사실적형성존재제다오구,사득형법규범여안건사실난이흡여기분지대응。안건사실적형성응해이형법규범위지도。대우안건사실,기요전면평개,우요금지중복평개。당안건존재합리부의시,응해주출대피고인유리적재결。재방법상응해견지류형사유적방법,주중류비추리,동시응해정학괄용거경이명중、거중이명경적방법。
Fact establishment is crucial in determining whether elements of a charge have been proven in criminal prosecution. In legal practice however, misconceptions abound in establishing facts, causing difficulties in establishing a match between the facts of a case and the requirement of element determination. Establishing facts in a criminal case should follow the guidance of criminal codes. Facts must be evaluated comprehensively but not repetitively. When a reasonable doubt exists, the case should be discharged in the defendant＇s favor. In methodology, thinking along analogies must be insisted and emphasized.