Can criminal investigation records be used as civil evidence?

A sued the court and demanded that Company B repay the loan of 654.38 million yuan. Company B thinks that the RMB 654.38+million is not a loan, but a share capital invested by Company B. Party A is a shareholder of Company B, but has not gone through the formalities for industrial and commercial change. According to the relevant provisions of the Company Law, this share capital cannot be returned. In addition, Company B reported to the public security organ that Company A had invaded the company's assets during the accounting period of Company B, and the public security organ interrogated Company A the day before the trial. In the criminal investigation record, A claimed to be a shareholder of Company B, and contributed RMB 654.38+10,000 as capital stock. Company B copied the criminal investigation record and provided it to the court as evidence, proving that A is a shareholder of Company B, and RMB 654.38 million is not a loan, but a share capital. The key question in this case is. One view is that the standard of proof in criminal cases is to eliminate all reasonable doubts, while in civil cases, the standard of proof in criminal cases is higher than that in civil cases, and the evidence in criminal cases can of course be used as civil evidence. Another view is that criminal evidence cannot be used as civil evidence. The criminal investigation record is formed when the investigation organ exercises state power over the criminal suspect, and this record can only be strictly limited to use in criminal cases. The use of criminal investigation transcripts in civil cases violates the rules of civil evidence. The author agrees with the second view. First of all, from the form of evidence, the criminal investigation record does not conform to the form of evidence stipulated in the Civil Procedure Law. Article 63 of the Civil Procedure Law stipulates that "there are the following types of evidence: (1) documentary evidence, (2) material evidence, (3) audio-visual materials, (4) witness testimony, (5) statements by the parties, (6) expert conclusions and (7) transcripts of inquests". As can be seen from article 63, there are only seven forms of civil evidence listed in China's Civil Procedure Law. Any material that does not conform to these seven forms cannot be used as evidence. What kind of evidence form does the criminal investigation record belong to? The first thing that can be excluded is audio-visual materials, physical evidence, witness testimony appraisal conclusions and inspection records. It is more likely to be documentary evidence and statements of the parties. Documentary evidence is evidence that proves the facts of a case through its contents. The criminal investigation record is only the record of the interrogation process of the criminal suspect by the investigation organ, and it cannot prove the facts of the case. As far as this case is concerned, the criminal investigation record can only prove that Party A made a statement to the investigation organ that "as a shareholder of Company B, it invested 654.38 million yuan", but it cannot prove the fact that "as a shareholder of Company B, it invested 654.38 million yuan". Judging from the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law on the form of evidence, the confession of a criminal suspect is a form of evidence alongside documentary evidence, not a kind of documentary evidence. Criminal investigation record does not belong to the statement of the parties. The statement of the parties refers to the statement of the facts of the case in the process of civil litigation, and the statement outside the litigation cannot be used as the evidence form of the "statement of the parties". It can also be seen from the stipulation that "the settlement reached by mediation cannot be used as evidence" in Several Provisions on Evidence in Civil Procedure that the evidence form of "statement by the parties" is strictly restricted in the civil procedure law. Secondly, judging from the source of evidence, the criminal investigation record is also illegal as a civil lawsuit. Criminal investigation is a severe measure for state power organs to investigate the criminal responsibility of criminal suspects and the most severe restriction on citizens' personal freedom. It should be carried out in strict accordance with legal procedures, and the materials and understandings formed during the investigation should be kept strictly confidential and must be used in criminal cases. The Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that those who have the right to copy the investigation record are the competent authorities and defense lawyers, and outsiders are not allowed to copy the investigation record. If outsiders hold evidence, its source should be illegal. According to the exclusionary rule of illegal evidence, the evidence cannot be used as evidence and should be excluded. Thirdly, judging from the evidence effect, the probative effect of the investigation record is extremely weak. According to the criminal procedure law, only the defendant's statement without relevant evidence cannot be used as the basis for finalizing the case. The essence of the investigation record is the statement of the criminal suspect, which cannot be directly used as the basis for finalizing the case. In the process of criminal investigation, the suspect is in a passive and weak position, and his statement may not necessarily reflect his true meaning. In the process of forming criminal investigation transcripts, there may still be cases of extorting confessions by torture, and in order to exonerate criminal suspects, they will make some statements that avoid the important and ignore the important, and the authenticity of their statements is extremely unreliable. In the prosecution stage, the court will combine other evidence to determine the authenticity of the evidence. In the process of civil litigation, it is impossible and unnecessary for a judge to know all the facts of the whole criminal case, and it is also impossible to appraise the authenticity of the investigation record. If this kind of direct evidence with unknown authenticity is applied to civil litigation, the facts of the case can only be unknown. Judging from the content of the evidence, it cannot be used as civil evidence. This criminal case is to investigate whether Party A occupies the company's property during its accounting period, which has nothing to do with whether Party A is a shareholder, and Party A's statement on this part has nothing to do with this case. If criminal investigation transcripts are allowed as civil evidence, there will be the problem of illegal evidence collection. It should be pointed out that excluding criminal investigation transcripts as civil evidence does not mean completely separating criminal cases from civil cases. In fact, there are a lot of overlapping cases between civil and criminal cases, and it is impossible to completely separate them. But this is different from the problem discussed in this paper. Because in civil and criminal cases, civil cases are often based on the facts identified in criminal cases. However, "taking the facts ascertained in criminal cases as the basis for deciding a case" conforms to the provisions of the Civil Procedure Law, while the facts ascertained by the court after trial belong to the "facts confirmed by the effective judgment of the people's court" in some provisions of the civil procedure rules, which do not require the parties to give evidence and conform to the rules of evidence. (Author: Gangzha District People's Court, Nantong City, Jiangsu Province)