The plaintiff accuses the defendant of unclear facts, how does the court decide?

If the facts of the plaintiff's accusation against the defendant are unclear, the court will not hold the defendant criminally liable.

The plaintiff accuses the defendant of unclear facts, and this should be based on facts, not just general statements. There are no facts to show that the facts are unclear, and the reason for the lack of facts is not valid. If there are no facts to show that the defendant's facts are unclear, then the court will rule against the plaintiff.

The court may rule to dismiss the indictment on the grounds of insufficient evidence, and the adverse consequences of insufficient evidence shall be borne by the person responsible for presenting the evidence.

In civil litigation, evidence is crucial. Before initiating a lawsuit, the plaintiff shall have sufficient evidence that can support his or her litigation claims. Because if there is insufficient evidence, the chances of losing the case will be very high, and the lawsuit may even be dismissed directly.

If the facts of the plaintiff's accusation against the defendant are unclear, the court will not make a judgment unless there is substantial evidence to prove that the plaintiff's accusation against the defendant is true.

If the plaintiff accuses the defendant that the facts are unclear.

The court will not decide.

Remanded to the police as unclear facts.

Let them be rehearsed, or yes.

Re-investigate. The court will not decide.

The facts of the court's verdict are clear.

How the court decides, either in favor of the plaintiff's claim or in favor of the defendant's claim, depends on the evidence of both parties and the validity of their evidence.

It depends on the evidence presented by both of you, and which side has the evidence, the court will award the victory.

If the facts of the plaintiff's accusation against the defendant are unclear, the court will look forward to it in accordance with the provisions of the law, and I believe that the court is fair and just, then you should have confidence in the court and the court's judgment, because it is now a legal society, and there is a law to follow.

The plaintiff sues the defendant, the facts are not good, how can the court decide, the court will continue to track the cause and process of this matter, and then make a judgment after investigating clearly.

If the plaintiff accuses the other party of unclear facts, the court will set aside the decision or use the grounds that the facts are unclear. No verdict is given.

The court dismissed it. The plaintiff lost the case.

If the facts are not clear, then there is no way to make a judgment, and a judgment should be made after the issue is investigated.

If it is not clear that the plaintiff is suing the defendant for the facts, the court will retry the case with the protection authority.

If the defendant 40 doesn't listen, then it should mean that the verdict is not valid, and there is no case, anyway, the defendant has not done anything wrong.

If the facts of the plaintiff's accusation against the defendant are unclear, and the court decides to say it, I think that if the accusation is not clear, it will definitely be acquitted.

The plaintiff sued the defendant 40 and it was not clear what the court would say. If there is no evidence to prove it, if the evidence is not clear, then the court will not be able to make a judgment.

If the plaintiff accuses the defendant of unclear facts, the court may require the defendant to clarify the facts and produce evidence.

Hello very happy to your question, the plaintiff accuses the defendant of unclear facts, the court will ask for relevant evidence, if there is no evidence, the court will not support it.

If the facts are unclear and the evidence is insufficient, the court cannot handle it, and it should be remanded for a new trial.

The court will dismiss the lawsuit and dismiss the lawsuit if the facts are unclear.

If the facts of the plaintiff's accusation against the defendant are unclear, the court will definitely postpone the decision.

The facts of the plaintiff's accusation against the defendant are unclear, and the court should re-examine the case before proceeding with the lawsuit.

The plaintiff accuses the defendant of unclear facts, and the court will decide that the facts are unclear or the evidence is insufficient.

The plaintiff accuses the defendant of unclear facts, how can it be judged anyway? I think the verdict should be based on the actual situation, and the court is based on evidence.

Hello, this situation is definitely waiting for the judge's decision, because the court he will investigate according to the requirements you said.

If the evidence is sufficient, the defendant will definitely lose.

If the facts are unclear and the other party cannot produce other valid evidence, then the accusation fails.

This kind of thing needs to be investigated, and the court investigates the case, just looking at the actual situation and the evidence, and in these sufficient circumstances, a conviction may be made.

If the facts were not clear, the court would certainly not uphold his claim.

If the facts are not clear, I don't think there is a way to refuse to quit.

Legal Analysis: Civil judgments, both the plaintiff and the defendant. After the people's court pronounces the judgment in a civil case, it shall send the civil judgment to both parties in accordance with relevant provisions, and if both parties are dissatisfied with the judgment of the people's court after receiving the civil judgment, they have the right to file an appeal within the legally-prescribed time.

Therefore, both the plaintiff and the defendant have the right to appeal to the people's court if they are dissatisfied with the civil judgment.

Legal basis: Article 148 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China: The People's Socks Court shall publicly announce the judgment in all cases that are tried in public or not in public. Where the verdict is announced at court, the written judgment shall be sent within 10 days; Where it is determined that the judgment is pronounced within the time limit, the written judgment is to be issued immediately after the judgment is announced.

When a judgment is pronounced, the parties must be informed of their right to appeal, the time limit for appeal, and the court in which the appeal will be made. When a divorce judgment is pronounced, the parties must be informed that they must not marry separately until the judgment takes legal effect.

Summary. Hello, I understand that you are anxious about this matter now, and I will give you a detailed answer right away If the plaintiff's complaint is not true, the court will challenge the plaintiff and require him to prove the authenticity of the complaint. If the plaintiff is unable to prove the authenticity of the complaint, the court will refuse to accept the case and file a lawsuit against the plaintiff to ascertain the authenticity of the complaint.

Hello, I understand your anxiety about this matter now, I will give you a detailed answer immediately If the plaintiff's complaint is not true, the court will raise suspicions against the plaintiff and require him to prove the authenticity of the complaint. If the plaintiff is unable to prove or sue the truth of the complaint, the court will refuse to accept the case and file a lawsuit against the plaintiff to ascertain the authenticity of the complaint.

If the plaintiff's complaint proves to be completely untrue or fraudulent, the court may dismiss the plaintiff's lawsuit or bring a lawsuit against the plaintiff and claim damages caused by the plaintiff's complaint. In conclusion, the court attaches great importance to an honest and transparent litigation process, and if the plaintiff is untrue or fraudulent, the court will take strict measures to protect the fair and impartial proceedings.

How judges generally sentence sentences.

When making a judgment in a criminal case, the judge will make a judgment based on whether the evidence of the crime is sufficient, and if the evidence is sufficient to prove the facts of the crime, the judge will find guilty.

Sentencing is based on the principle of legality of crimes, and the punishment for any crime is the same.

Article 3 of the Criminal Law: [Legality for Crimes] Where the law clearly provides that it is a criminal act, it shall be convicted and sentenced in accordance with the law; Where the law does not expressly provide for criminal conduct, it must not be convicted and sentenced.

Article 5: [Proportionality of Punishment for Crime] The severity of the punishment shall be commensurate with the crime committed and the criminal responsibility borne by the criminal.

Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China

Article 200: After the defendant's final statement, the presiding judge, Bureau Oak, announced an adjournment, and the collegial panel deliberated and made the following judgments on the basis of the ascertained facts, evidence, and relevant legal provisions:

1) Where the facts of the case are clear, the evidence is credible and sufficient, and the defendant is found guilty on the basis of law, a guilty verdict shall be made;

2) Where the defendant is found not guilty in accordance with law, a not-guilty verdict shall be made;

3) Where the evidence is insufficient and the defendant cannot be found guilty, a not-guilty verdict shall be made that the evidence is insufficient and the alleged crime cannot be established.

When making a judgment in a criminal case, the judge will make a judgment based on whether the evidence of the crime is sufficient, and if the evidence is sufficient to prove the facts of the crime, the judge will be found guilty. If readers need legal help, they are welcome to Hualu.com for legal advice.

In public prosecution cases where a sentence of up to 3 years imprisonment, short-term detention, controlled release or a fine may be imposed in accordance with law, where the facts are clear and the evidence is sufficient, and the people's procuratorate recommends or agrees to apply the summary procedures.

Tell the case before it is handled.

Minor criminal cases prosecuted by the victim and supported by evidence.

Cases in which the people's court may sentence the defendant in a public prosecution case to be exempted from criminal sanctions.

Legal basis: Article 202 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China: People's courts hearing public prosecution cases shall announce the verdict within 2 months of accepting it, and must not exceed 3 months at the latest. In cases of banquets where the death penalty might be given, or cases of attached civil litigation by a person who is a person who is in a state of distress, as well as in any of the circumstances provided for in article 156 of this Law, an extension of three months may be granted upon approval by the people's court at the level above; Where an extension is necessary due to special circumstances, it shall be reported to the Supreme People's Court for approval.

In cases where the people's court changes jurisdiction, the time limit for trial is calculated from the date on which the changed people's court receives the case.

In cases where the people's procuratorate is supplementing the investigation, after the supplementary investigation is completed and transferred to the people's court, the people's court is to recalculate the time limit for trial.

Judging from the above procedural time limits, the verdict can be pronounced in about 6 months in general criminal cases, and more than one year in complex cases.

The plaintiff's evidence is sufficient, the facts are clear, and the judge will make a judgment in favor of the plaintiff in accordance with the law.

The judge will make a fair and impartial judgment based on the parties' facts, evidence, and the provisions of the law.