| Restricting self-identification as a party’s litigation behavior is manifested in imposing additional restrictions on the basis of acknowledging the facts of the case claimed by the other party in order to offset the legal effect of the recognition part.It is an incomplete and conditional self-admission.Whether this type of party’s statement constitutes a complete self-confidence in the true sense depends on the content of the additional restrictions on the basis of the facts and the relationship between the facts and the restrictions.The difference in the content of the restrictions may be It will make the judges have different perceptions of the parties’ statements and affect the outcome of the trial.Therefore,the research on the additional restrictions and whether the restriction of self-confidence constitutes complete self-confidence is particularly important.However,the legislation on the restriction on self-confidence system is in its infancy.In addition to defining the concept of restriction on self-confidence,the issues concerning the judgment criteria of restriction on self-confidence,applicable time and space,withdrawal conditions,and whether the restriction on self-confidence is separable are still in its infancy.The legislation is blank,lacking clarity and operability.At the same time,theoretically,there are relatively few research results centered on additional restrictions,and there is no clear standard for judging additional restrictions.A large number of cases are based on judges using existing evidence or free evidence to determine whether the party’s restrictive statement is It constitutes self-confession without analyzing the relationship between the recognition of facts and additional restrictions.In response to controversial issues in practice,in addition to the relevant theories that clearly limit self-confidence,it is more important to resolve the application of the system.This article mainly solves the following three problems: 1.Limit the judgment of self-confidence.2.The application of additional restrictions.3.A discussion on whether there is a separability between the factual recognition part and the additional restrictions.First of all,on the issue of limiting self-identification,this article compares the limitation of self-identification with similar theoretical concepts to find out the similarities and differences.The purpose is to reveal and correct the judge’s misunderstanding in the practice of confusing similar situations such as restriction of self-confession and reasoned denial.Secondly,on the issue of the application of additional restrictions,it not only contains the understanding of the entity content of the additional restrictions,but also requires us to grasp the procedural matters that apply the additional restrictions.Therefore,this article considers both the entity and the procedure The elaboration is more appropriate.Finally,the study of whether restricted self-admission is separable is the core of judging whether restricted self-admission can be recognized as complete self-admission.It is a key step that affects the outcome of the case.It clearly recognizes the separability between facts and additional restrictions. classification standards can better provide judges with a basis for trial.Therefore,this article takes the additional restrictions as the starting point of the research,discovers the problems by collecting real domestic cases,and combines the beneficial research results at home and abroad,and focuses on the concept analysis of the restriction of self-identification system,the application of additional restrictions,the restrictions and the recognition of facts Several parts of the relationship between,put forward their own views and opinions on the content that has not yet been clarified in the legislation. |
