集中審理視角下民事證據──調查階段化研究

民事訴訟中證據調查的順序安排直接關係到庭審的效率與質量。我國立法在庭審外部層面將證據調查置於法庭辯論之前，在證據調查內部層面將人證置於書證物證之前。實務中證據調查的內部順序又異化為主體輪流舉證的混雜模式，進而引發了調查程序臃腫拖遝以及人證調查效果不佳的問題。究其原因，乃在於立法忽視了爭點整理的前提基礎且混淆了不同種類證據的作用原理。集約化的證據調查程序需要具備充分爭點整理及高效人證調查兩個要素。我國應當在庭審外部階段重置法庭辯論與證據調查的順位，在證據調查內部階段將書證物證置於人證之前，並通過主張和書證的整理明確爭點，進而在為人證詢問做好充分運行準備的基礎上，完善職權詢問的規則以實現高效集約的證據調查。

The order of the evidence investigation in the civil action is directly related to the efficiency and quality of the trial. The legislation of China puts the evidence investigation before the court debate at the external level of the court trial, and the witness before the documentary evidences and material evidences at the internal level of the evidence investigation. In practice, the internal order of evidence investigation is dissimilated into the mixed mode of the subject taking turns to provide evidence, which leads to the problems of bloated and dilatory investigation procedure and the poor effect of witness investigation. The reason lies in the fact that the legislation ignores the premise and basis of issues arrangement and confuses the function of different kinds of evidences. Intensive evidence investigation procedure needs two elements: sufficient issues arrangement and efficient witness investigation. China should reset the order of court debate and court investigation at the external level of the court trial, place documentary evidences and material evidences before the witness, clarify the issues through the arrangement of claims and documentary evidences, and be fully prepared for witness inquiry, in order to improve the rules of authority evidence inquiry to realize efficient and intensive evidence investigation.