中国认罪认罚从宽制度下无罪辩护问题研究

• 영문명: Research on the Issue of Innocent Defense under China’s Plea-Guilty and Leniency System
• 발행기관: YIXIN 출판사
• 저자명: Feng Kezhen Yang Yanyan
• 간행물 정보: 『Journal of east Asian law studies』Vol.2 No.1, 15~22쪽, 전체 8쪽
• 주제분류: 사회과학 > 교육학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2025.03.31

국문 초록

The latest empirical research shows that the phenomenon of innocence defense in cases of plea-guilty and punishment-mitigation still persists. Judicial organs adopt two different handling modes, namely “express prohibition” and “relative tolerance”, which have certain obstacles to the fair implementation of the plea-guilty and punishment-mitigation system and the exercise of the right to defense. Exploring the root causes, the lack of proper justification of this system makes it difficult to ensure the authenticity and voluntariness of the accused's plea-guilty and punishment-acceptance in some cases, prompting the defender to raise an innocence defense. However, if lawyers are allowed to conduct innocence defense without restrictions, it will not only impact the application of the plea-guilty and punishment-mitigation system but also put the accused’s rights and interests of punishment mitigation at risk. In view of this, on the one hand, it is necessary to improve the plea-guilty and punishment-mitigation system, with a focus on rectifying the unbalanced prosecution-defense structure. This includes coordinating the relationship between legal assistance and legal defense, improving the reasoning system for sentencing recommendations, and strengthening the court's substantive review, so as to ensure the full exertion of the right to defense before trial and prevent unnecessary innocence defenses. On the other hand, innocence defense should preferably be limited to cases where there are no disputes between the prosecution and the defense during the pre-trial stage. The situation of re-entrusting a defense during the court-trial stage can be treated as an exception, in order to balance the stability of the system and the protection of rights and interests.

영문 초록

最新实证研究显示，认罪认罚案件中无罪辩护现象仍未消弭，司法机关对此存在“明确禁止”与“相对容忍”两种处理模式，这对认罪认罚从宽制度的公正落实及辩护权行使产生了一定阻碍。探究根源，该制度正当化程度欠佳，致使部分案件难以确保被追诉人认罪认罚的真实自愿，促使辩护人提出无罪辩护。然而，若不加约束地允许律师无罪辩护，不但会冲击认罪认罚从宽制度的适用，还会使被追诉人的从宽权益岌岌可危。鉴于此，一方面要完善认罪认罚从宽制度，重点改造失衡的控辩结构，如协调法律帮助与辩护关系、完善量刑建议说理、强化法院实质审查，保障审前辩护权充分施展，预防不必要的无罪辩护；另一方面，宜将无罪辩护限定于审前阶段且控辩双方无争议的案件，庭审阶段重新委托辩护的情况可作例外处理，以此平衡制度稳定与权益保障。

목차

Ⅰ. 引言

Ⅱ. 认罪认罚案件无罪辩护的实践处理模式

Ⅲ. 认罪认罚案件无罪辩护的原因剖析

Ⅳ. 认罪认罚案件无罪辩护的保障与限制

Ⅴ. 结语

키워드

Pleading guilty and accepting punishment Defense of innocence Imbalance in the structure of prosecution and defense The right to defense 认罪认罚 无罪辩护 控辩结构失衡 辩护权