從事實推定走向表見證明

From Factual Presumption to Prima Facie

無論是概念界定還是司法實踐，事實推定在各國均引發了長期的爭議乃至質疑。從實踐狀況看，法官運用經驗法則進行事實推定的模式可分為間接證明和表見證明。為了避免混亂，尤其為了實現武器平等、程序公平和法律適用之統一，我國未來有必要引入表見證明以取代備受爭議的事實推定。作為一種證明規則，表見證明的實質在於：將證明對象從要件事實轉化為更容易證明的典型的關聯事實。這樣的證明減輕規則通常以“典型事實經過”為適用前提，並以蓋然性較高的經驗法則為基礎，從而在防止法官恣意和提高判決的信服力方面發揮重要作用。從證明效力上看，表見證明既未重新分配證明責任，也未降低證明標準，而僅倒置了具體的舉證責任。為了動搖表見證明的結論，對方當事人只需提交反證證明其他的“非典型事實經過”存在重大可能性即可。為了實現表見證明承擔的統一法律適用的功能，我國未來還有必要改革審級建構和轉變最高人民法院的功能，以構建起表見證明的判例體系。在此方面，德國的學說爭鳴與判例經驗提供了有益的參考與對照。

For a long time, there have been debates and even doubt about the presumption of fact (factual presumption), both in the aspect of theory and practice. In order to avoid the confusion thereby, it is necessary to introduce the prima facie (Anscheinsbeweis) in the sense of the civil law. The prima facie can also contribute to the guarantee of the equal weapon doctrine, due process and the unification of judgments. Although both the prima facie and the circumstantial evidence belong to the presumption of fact, the former is based on the common experience with high probability, which is formulated as 'typical occurrence'. The prima facie makes the party having the burden of persuasion possible to prove circumstantial facts instead of material facts and it comes into use during the evaluation of evidence, working as a bridge between the circumstantial and material facts. The prima facie neither shifts the burden of persuasion nor reduces the standard of proof. Therefore, the opponent can produce evidence to rebut the prima facie. In order to make sure that the prima facie perform the functions as expected, the Supreme People's Court should set forth the basic principles and regulations for using the prima facie in the judicial practice. In this aspect, the theoretical discussions and the judicial decisions in Germany could be substantially helpful.