| The principle of in dubio pro reo requires the construction of a hierarchical and systematic judgment and application rules in substantive law. Firstly, it is necessary to accurately grasp the legal effect of the doubt in the factual premise of conviction. If the facts that affect the conviction of a felony are in doubt and there is no alternative misdemeanor, the defendant should be pronounced not guilty. When the facts in doubt are evaluated as unimportant, the conclusion of guilty can still be drawn. Secondly, courts should further study and judge the situations when the facts are in doubt and involve the choice of charges. The doubt in facts does not mean that the defendant must be pronounced not guilty. In cases where the facts of a felony are in doubt but have a hierarchical relationship with another crime, the defendant may be convicted of a misdemeanor or basic crime instead. When the facts of both a misdemeanor and felony are in doubt, “alternative judgment” will undermine the stability of law and therefore should be negated. Thirdly, after solving the problem of conviction, courts should pay attention to the doubt in facts that affects sentencing and make sure that it is beneficial to the defendant. Finally, it is necessary to examine whether there are situations in which the application of the principle of in dubio pro reo is excluded, such as legal fiction or lack of clarity in the meaning of legal provisions. Constructing the rules on the application of the principle of in dubio pro reo from the perspective of criminal law, by highlighting the importance of systematic thinking while balancing problem-oriented thinking, is superior in methodology. |
京公网安备11010102006664号 京ICP备2023015853号