A Study On The Effect Of Prejudgment Of Effective Criminal Judgment In Civil Litigation

Criminal-civilian crossover cases are becoming more and more common,and the field of criminal-civilian crossover becomes an unavoidable problem in judicial practice.China's legislative regulations,judicial practice and academic research are independent of each other,and civil litigation research and criminal litigation research are dual.A few researches on the intersection of the two also focus on the level of procedural law,and the level of substantive law needs to be further explored.The existing legislative provisions on the subject of this article are simple,and Article 93 of the "Interpretation of the Application of the" Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China "provides that" the parties need not prove by proof that:......(5)it has legal effect for the people's court The facts confirmed by the tribunal of the…… except for the facts specified in items 5 to 7,except that the parties have evidence to the contrary that is sufficient to overturn.”Article 10 of the“ Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Procedure ”stipulates:“ The following facts The parties do not need to provide evidence to prove that:(6)the basic facts confirmed by the ruling in which the people's court has become legally effective...except for the sixth and seventh facts,except that the parties have evidence to the contrary that can be overturned.The "Evidence Regulations" in 2019 reduced the exemption facts to basic facts.How to interpret and apply the above-mentioned law has become a point of contention in the academic and practical circles.This article discusses the effectiveness of the prejudgment of effective criminal judgments in subsequent civil proceedings with case analysis and research methods.The first part analyzes the current situation of legislation and judicial practice.Combining three typical cases,the author raises questions about the definition,scope,classification,and overturning criteria of the effectiveness of the criminal judgment's prejudgment in force in civil proceedings.The second part is the analysis of the concept of pre-determined effectiveness.The effectiveness of pre-determination is different from the adjudicated power.Its subjective scope includes criminal parties and outsiders.The subjective scope should be strictly limited to the same fact.In addition,the author makes a comparative analysis of the concepts related to the effectiveness of the common law system in the United States and in the civil law system.The third part is the analysis of the effectiveness of different types of effective criminal judgments in civil proceedings.Combining with the case,the author believes that the criminal conviction of a guilty criminal judgement should have pre-determination effect,and the indirect auxiliary facts should not have pre-determination effect.According to the law,the innocent criminal judgement has pre-determination effect,and the suspected innocent criminal judgement should not have pre-determination effect.The fourth part is the analysis of the validity of the prejudgment of the overturning effective criminal judgment in civil proceedings.The object of proof,the burden of proof,and the standard of proof in civil and criminal proceedings are different.The difference between the evidence of civil and criminal proceedings is the root of the problem of overturning the validity of pre-determination.In civil lawsuits,the proof standard for the effect of an outsider overturning a criminal decision in a criminal case should be weaker than that of the criminal party.After the pre-decision effect is overturned,the parties shall re-prove evidence in accordance with the standards of civil procedure.Attempts can be made to establish a system for outsiders to participate in criminal proceedings and a system for civil judges to hold accountability for factual errors in criminal judgments in force.