The Study Of The Effectiveness Of The Civil Effective Decision On The Follow-up Criminal Procedure Between Prisoners And Criminals

At present,the academic research on the procedure of the criminal cross-case has been more in-depth,for the criminal cross-case in the first judgment effectiveness research is less,not systematic.Among them,the academic circles can basically reach a consensus on the validity of the prior criminal judgment.However,the effect of the sentence on the follow-up criminal procedure in the civil affairs is not deeply discussed in theory,and the system is not perfect,which leads to the lack of clear guidance and different practices in judicial practice when dealing with the corresponding problems.In view of the judicial practice,the effect of the sentence on the subsequent criminal procedure usually occurs in the case of the criminal justice,so this article uses the case of the criminal justice to cross the case As a starting point,this paper discusses the effectiveness of the sentence in the case of criminal justice in the case of civil justice in the subsequent criminal proceedings from three angles: theoretical basis,practical investigation and cause analysis,and puts forward some suggestions for improvement.In addition to the introduction,the full text consists of four parts.The first part combs the theoretical basis of the validity of the sentence on the subsequent criminal procedure in the civil affairs.In defining the concept and connotation of the validity of the judgment in the civil affairs,the author analyzes the similarities and differences between the above theory and the validity of the first civil effective judgment with the help of relevant theories,such as the theory of res judicata,the theory of pre-final effect theory of documentary evidence,so as to interpret the concrete connotation of the first civil effective judgment to the effect of the subsequent criminal procedure.This paper defines the validity connotation of the first civil effective judgment to the subsequent criminal proceedings as including two aspects: factual determination and evidence application.The second part focuses on the judicial practice,combined with the judicial practice of the criminal cross specific cases,the criminal cross cases are divided into two categories,namely the substantive criminal cross cases and procedural criminal cross cases,under these two types around the facts and evidence use of these two aspects of the discussion.Based on the current judicial practice,the crime of criminal crossing mainly occurs in the field of economic crime,so this part mainly focuses on the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits,the crime of fund-raising fraud,and the crime of contract fraud.Through the practice investigation,we can find that there are three main problems: the boundary between the criminal and the people is blurred;the fact and the later confirmation of the civil effective judgment There will be conflicts in the continuation of criminal proceedings,and there are some problems such as the inconsistency between the rules of civil evidence and the rules of criminal evidence.The third part analyzes the reasons for the confusion of the effectiveness of criminal proceedings in civil effective judgment,which is divided into three angles: concept level,procedure level and evidence level.At the conceptual level,it is mainly due to the difference of the values of criminal law and civil law,and at the same time,the judicial practice has the manifestation of universal criminal law;at the procedural level,it is mainly due to the fact that the relevant provisions of the criminal and civil cross-processing procedures are not enough to cope with the development of judicial practice;at the evidentiary level,it is mainly based on the difference between the criminal evidence and the civil evidence system.In particular,some of this part is the root cause,which can not be changed and does not need to be changed,such as criminal law,civil law values brought about by differences in the concept of punishment The differences between litigation and civil litigation in the construction of specific systems are reflected in the differences between the two major evidentiary systems,such as proof standards,proof liability and other aspects,some of which are alienation in practice,such as the different practices of subsequent criminal proceedings in the examination and determination of evidence such as the whole evidence of the judgment of the ancestors or the documentary evidence of their determination in the subsequent criminal proceedings,which can provide some ideas for the improvement of the subsequent countermeasures.In the fourth part,the author puts forward some suggestions to improve the effectiveness of the subsequent criminal procedure in the case of the criminal justice.This part of the content,mainly around three aspects.First,from the macro level,it is necessary to objectively view the differences in the concept of the criminal people,strengthen the communication between the criminal and civil officials,but also set up the thinking of the final law of criminal law;second,improve the link mechanism between civil procedure and criminal procedure,which is embodied in how to start criminal prosecution in cases of "routine loan" type and the link between civil execution and subsequent criminal procedure.Whether the amount of the crime that has been executed is necessary to be evaluated again in the subsequent criminal proceedings should be analyzed in the light of the specific circumstances of the case.Third,the connection between civil evidence and criminal evidence,this paper mainly focuses on the identification of documents in the first civil judgment,such as traffic accident identification in the follow-up criminal proceedings review and use,it is necessary in the follow-up criminal proceedings combined with the whole case evidence to strengthen the substantive examination of traffic accident identification,but also to make a further refinement of the provisions of civil self-recognition,in order to adapt to the fact of civil self-recognition in the follow-up.application in criminal proceedings.