부산대학교 도서관

直接证据与间接证据作为一种古老而重要的分类方法，其既存在于大陆法系又适用于英美法系，国外理论界对于直接证据与间接证据划分标准的研究也较为完善. 我国司法实践中关于直接证据与间接证据的运用大量、广泛地存在着，并对待证事实的确认起着重要的作用，然而理论界及实务界对此并未给予足够的重视. 因此，有必要对于这一重要议题予以探讨. 首先应当是对我国在直接证据与间接证据划分标准存在的问题进行归纳梳理. 在此基础上，从比较法视角对国外的理论研究进行分析，通过甄别与选择，从而对我国划分标准存在的问题进行反思，指出我国对于划分标准的理论难题在于：一是划分标准采用的是类似于英美法系的按推理方式进行划分而非大陆法系的对象划分；二是法律构成要件中的某些要件具有明显的法律评价性，使得直接证据在对这些事实要件进行证明时往往陷入证明不能的困境. 因此，应当对我国直接证据与间接证据的划分标准的界定进行“拨乱反正”，并将法律事实构成要件中的评价性要件从“主要事实”中予以剥离，从而对直接证据与间接证据的划分标准进行理论重构.
Direct evidence and indirect evidence as an ancient and important classification method, which exists both in the civil law system and applicable to the Anglo-American law system, Foreign theory for direct evidence and indirect evidence of the standard of the study is also more perfect. In the judicial practice of our country, the use of direct evidence and indirect evidence is extensive and widespread, and it plays an important role in confirming the confirmation of the facts. However, the theoretical and practical circles have not paid enough attention to it. It is therefore necessary to explore this important issue. First of all, it should be in China to sum up the direct evidence and indirect evidence of the existence and the standard. On this basis, from the perspective of comparative analysis of foreign theoretical research, through screening and selection, so as to reflect the existence of China's standard. It is pointed out that the theoretical difficulty of dividing the standard in our country lies in the following: firstly, the division standard adopts the division of the method according to the reasoning way of the common law system, rather than the division of the civil law system. Second, some elements of the legal constituent elements have obvious Legal evaluation, so that direct evidence in the fact that these elements are often proved to be unable to prove the plight. So that direct evidence proves that these factual elements tend to fall into a difficult predicament. Therefore, the definition of the directive evidence and indirect evidence should be defined as “disregarding anyway”, and the evaluation elements in the legal factual elements should be stripped from the “main facts”, so that the criterion of direct and indirect evidence to carry out theoretical reconstruction. So that get the theoretical reconstruction for the direct evidence and indirect evidence of the division standard.