Evidence serves as the fundamental basis for judicial adjudication, and judges do not merely "accept evidence" but evaluate it based on statutory rules and procedural standards to ultimately clarify the facts of the case.
1. The Core Premise of Evidence Evaluation: Admissibility
Whether evidence is submitted to the court is the first step in evaluation, and only when it possesses admissibility can it proceed to substantive examination.
1.1 Priority of Legality
The acquisition, collection, 電マ,and preservation of evidence must comply with legal provisions, and evidence obtained through methods such as torture, illegal recording, or fabrication is excluded from direct use and lacks the qualification to be submitted in court.
1.2 Guarantee of Authenticity
Evidence must be objective facts and cannot consist of subjective conjectures or fabricated content. Written evidence or material evidence must be verified in the original form, while testimony must exclude speculation to ensure its truthfulness and reliability.
1.3 Relevance Requirement
Evidence must have a direct or indirect relevance to the facts that need to be proven in the case. Materials unrelated to the case, even if true or lawful, are not subject to evaluation.
II. The Key to Evidence Evaluation: Judgment of Evidence Force
After possessing probative capacity, the judge further evaluates the strength of the evidence, namely the extent to which the evidence proves the facts.
2.1 Classification of Proof Strength
Original evidence (such as originals, items, etc.) holds greater evidentiary weight than derivative evidence (copies, indirect testimonies, etc.), while direct evidence (such as loan records, surveillance footage, etc.) can directly prove facts and carries stronger evidentiary force than indirect evidence.
2.2 Cross-verification of Evidence
A single piece of evidence ラブグッズ cannot lead to a definitive judgment, as judges must assess whether multiple pieces of evidence can corroborate each other and form a complete chain of evidence. The probative force of evidence with unresolved contradictions is not recognized.
III. The Final Criterion for Evidence Evaluation: The Exclusion of Reasonable Doubt
In civil and administrative cases, the focus is on a high degree of probability, whereas in criminal cases, "exclusion of reasonable doubt" is required. That is, after combining evidence, the conclusion must be unique, with no reasonable explanation for doubts, upon which the judge forms an internal conviction and delivers a verdict.
The evaluation of evidence by the court involves a step-by-step selection based on legality, authenticity, and relevance, as well as a comprehensive assessment of evidentiary weight. Only by taking evidence as the core can judicial fairness be achieved.