The Effect Of False Self-admission

The conditions for revocation of self-admission and revocation of self-admission under the old law both included the fact that self-admitted facts are not true,and this has led to the evasion of the rules for self-admission revocation.In order to activate the self-admission revocation system,the Supreme People’s Court reorganized the selfadmission revocation rules and removed the requirement that the self-admitted party prove that the content of the self-admission is objective and untrue.However,how to improve the self-admission and revocation system,how to coordinate the selfadmission revocation system and the self-admission overrule system,and other issues remain unresolved.Only by reconstructing the concept of untrue self-confession based on the authenticity of the self-confessed party’s subjective intentions,and perfecting the selfconfidence cancellation system and self-confidence review system,can the problem of false self-confidence be regulated and resolved in a scientific and effective manner.This article believes that untrue self-confession refers to the fact that the self-confessing party does not express its intention based on the truth,that is,the unfavorable recognition made by the party not based on the true intentions,including malicious collusion of false self-confessions,unilateral false self-confession,and self-confidence due to major misunderstandings,self-confession due to fraud,coercion,or major misunderstanding.According to the theory of flaws in the validity of civil legal acts,combined with the pursuit of justice,fairness,stability,and authoritative and efficient dispute resolution in civil litigation,distinguish the validity of untrue self-confession and its remedies.First,the party’s malicious collusion of untrue self-confirmation is invalid;second,the party’s unilateral deliberate untrue self-confirmation is deemed valid;third,the party’s untrue self-approval is revoked due to fraud,coercion,or major misunderstanding.When the party who admits itself is revoked due to fraud or coercion,it must provide a written application and provide corresponding evidence to prove that the facts such as fraud or coercion are highly probable before it can withdraw its self-confidence.When a party revokes his self-confession due to a major misunderstanding,the judge should pay attention to the following two points when determining a major misunderstanding: First,help the judge to change the mindset of focusing only on the objective condition of whether the self-confessed facts are true or not,and require the judge to review whether the self-confessed party has a major misunderstanding.Second,allow judges to comprehensively judge whether the parties have major misunderstandings based on reasonable factors such as the authenticity of the facts they admit,the parties’ legal knowledge level,social status,cognitive ability,and economic level,combined with their life experience.It should be clarified that the self-admission cancellation system is the main means of regulating untrue self-admission.The selfadmitted party cannot revoke self-admission by acknowledging that the facts are untrue,but can only revoke self-admission by expressing the untrue.The invalid confession formed by malicious collusion does not have the effect of trial exclusion.The judge can investigate the authenticity of the confession facts according to his powers,and even overturn such confession.In addition to invalid confession that cannot restrain the judge,revocation of confession,if not revoked by the self-confessing party,is still the basis for judges to decide cases.Judges need to strengthen the interpretation of the law and facts and warn of the consequences of the self-confessing party.At the same time,judges should punish malicious parties who use their confession to conduct false litigation.