论文部分内容阅读
类推是一种基于相似性的证立方法,文章在区分类推之结构与功能的前提下展开。类推的特别结构是:它以一项调整与待决案件相似事实的既有规范(类推基础)为出发点,通过一般化得出一项适用范围更广的规范,从而将待决案件涵括其下。类比“推理”并不符合严格的逻辑要求,其法律确信度取决于类推基础的一般化是否足以令人信服。应与类推结构相区分的是它的功能,它作为证立手段,既服务于狭义的法律适用,亦可作为法官进行法律续造的手段。一直以来,默示类推与明示类推都是德国联邦最高法院民事判决中的证立形式之一,大多数类推的适用与拒绝都是以结果导向为前提进行目的衡量的产物。区分类推的结构与功能同样有助于解决刑法和行政法领域的类推问题。
Analogy is a kind of evidence based on the similarity of the method, the article in the classification of the structure and function of the premise. The specific structure of analogy is that it takes as its starting point an existing norm (analogy basis) that adjusts to the fact of a pending case, generalizes a more applicable norms so that the pending cases include under. The analogy “reasoning ” does not meet the strict logic requirements, and its legal certainty depends on whether the generalization of the analogy is sufficiently convincing. It should be distinguished from the analogy structure by its function as a means of justification that serves both the narrow application of law and the continuation of law by judges. All along, both implied analogy and explicit analogy are one of the forms of evidence in the civil judgments of the German Supreme Court. The application and refusal of most analogies are the products of measurement based on outcome-oriented premise. The structure and function of analogical deduction can also help to solve analogy issues in the area of criminal law and administrative law.