{"title":"民事函件或书面证据的复印件","authors":"Santi Wijaya, S. Suparno","doi":"10.4108/eai.16-4-2022.2319836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":". Evidence in the civil court process is the truth that the judge seeks and realizes. There are in the common court process is reality that the appointed authority looks for and understands. There are times when the gatherings submit evidence of a letter as a copy yet never again have the first letter, so it can't be coordinated with the first letter at the preliminary times when the parties submit proof of a letter in the form of a photocopy but no longer have the original letter, so it cannot be matched with the original letter at the trial. The sort of exploration is library research with a regularizing lawful examination approach. The essential examination information source is optional information to gather information from writing and report studies. The information examination technique was done logically and investigated by subjective standardizing strategies. The consequences of the review presumed that a copy of a letter or composed proof in a common case could be acknowledged whether the copy of the letter has been coordinated with the first or by an authority proclaimed to be under the original and has perfect and binding evidentiary power, and the legal basis for the judge's thought in inspecting proof. Copy of the letter on Decision Number 23/Pdt.G/2018/PN Bbs, to be specific the Jurisprudence of the Supreme Court in Supreme Court Decision No. 3609 K/Pdt/1985 that a copy of a letter/report which can never be demonstrated to be unique can't be considered as proof of a letter as indicated by the Civil Procedure Code.","PeriodicalId":329533,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Law, Social Science, Economics, and Education, ICLSSEE 2022, 16 April 2022, Semarang, Indonesia","volume":"199 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Legal Strength of Evidence Photocopy of Letter or Written Evidence in Civil Matter\",\"authors\":\"Santi Wijaya, S. Suparno\",\"doi\":\"10.4108/eai.16-4-2022.2319836\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\". Evidence in the civil court process is the truth that the judge seeks and realizes. There are in the common court process is reality that the appointed authority looks for and understands. There are times when the gatherings submit evidence of a letter as a copy yet never again have the first letter, so it can't be coordinated with the first letter at the preliminary times when the parties submit proof of a letter in the form of a photocopy but no longer have the original letter, so it cannot be matched with the original letter at the trial. The sort of exploration is library research with a regularizing lawful examination approach. The essential examination information source is optional information to gather information from writing and report studies. The information examination technique was done logically and investigated by subjective standardizing strategies. The consequences of the review presumed that a copy of a letter or composed proof in a common case could be acknowledged whether the copy of the letter has been coordinated with the first or by an authority proclaimed to be under the original and has perfect and binding evidentiary power, and the legal basis for the judge's thought in inspecting proof. Copy of the letter on Decision Number 23/Pdt.G/2018/PN Bbs, to be specific the Jurisprudence of the Supreme Court in Supreme Court Decision No. 3609 K/Pdt/1985 that a copy of a letter/report which can never be demonstrated to be unique can't be considered as proof of a letter as indicated by the Civil Procedure Code.\",\"PeriodicalId\":329533,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Law, Social Science, Economics, and Education, ICLSSEE 2022, 16 April 2022, Semarang, Indonesia\",\"volume\":\"199 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Law, Social Science, Economics, and Education, ICLSSEE 2022, 16 April 2022, Semarang, Indonesia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.16-4-2022.2319836\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Law, Social Science, Economics, and Education, ICLSSEE 2022, 16 April 2022, Semarang, Indonesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.16-4-2022.2319836","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

。在民事诉讼过程中,证据是法官寻求和实现的事实。在共同的法庭程序中,有被指定的当局寻找和理解的现实。有时当事人以复印件的形式提交证据,但再也没有首字母,因此在当事人以复印件的形式提交证据,但不再有原始信件的初步时间,它不能与首字母协调,因此在审判中无法与原始信件匹配。这种探索是图书馆研究,采用正规的合法检查方法。必要的考试信息源是可选信息,从写作和报告研究中收集信息。信息检测技术是逻辑化的,采用主观标准化策略进行调查。审查的结果假定,在普通案件中,信件或组成证据的副本是否与原件协调,或是否由被宣布隶属于原件并具有完善和具有约束力的证据权力的机构确认,以及法官审查证据思想的法律依据。关于第23/Pdt号决定的信函副本。G/2018/PN Bbs,具体而言,最高法院在最高法院第3609 K/Pdt/1985号决定中的判例认为,根据《民事诉讼法》的规定,永远无法证明其独特性的信件/报告副本不能被视为信件的证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Legal Strength of Evidence Photocopy of Letter or Written Evidence in Civil Matter
. Evidence in the civil court process is the truth that the judge seeks and realizes. There are in the common court process is reality that the appointed authority looks for and understands. There are times when the gatherings submit evidence of a letter as a copy yet never again have the first letter, so it can't be coordinated with the first letter at the preliminary times when the parties submit proof of a letter in the form of a photocopy but no longer have the original letter, so it cannot be matched with the original letter at the trial. The sort of exploration is library research with a regularizing lawful examination approach. The essential examination information source is optional information to gather information from writing and report studies. The information examination technique was done logically and investigated by subjective standardizing strategies. The consequences of the review presumed that a copy of a letter or composed proof in a common case could be acknowledged whether the copy of the letter has been coordinated with the first or by an authority proclaimed to be under the original and has perfect and binding evidentiary power, and the legal basis for the judge's thought in inspecting proof. Copy of the letter on Decision Number 23/Pdt.G/2018/PN Bbs, to be specific the Jurisprudence of the Supreme Court in Supreme Court Decision No. 3609 K/Pdt/1985 that a copy of a letter/report which can never be demonstrated to be unique can't be considered as proof of a letter as indicated by the Civil Procedure Code.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Application of The Contradictoire Delimitatie Principle of Land Registration Provides Legal Assurance of Land Rights Fulfillment Of Patient Rights in The Implementation of Telemedicine in The Era of Covid-19 Pandemic in Indonesia The Contribution of The Realization of Exports of Crude Palm Oil to Farmers’ Income and Employment in Jambi Province Intellectual Property Rights on Traditional Knowledge The Effectiveness of Police Patrols Against Street Crimes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1