我国反垄断民事诉讼举证责任分配制度之检讨——以典型案例为样本

我国反垄断民事诉讼中原告胜诉率极低，其根本原因在于原告举证困难。这与我国目前对于反垄断民事诉讼举证责任分配的处理直接相关。反垄断民事诉讼较为特殊，不能适用民事诉讼的一般举证责任分配法则，而应实行举证责任倒置制度，将本应由原告承担的部分举证责任分配给被告。最高人民法院《反垄断司法解释》对此有所考量，但仍显保守，对减轻原告举证责任效果有限。奇虎公司诉腾讯公司垄断纠纷案及锐邦涌和公司诉强生公司垄断纠纷案也表明，我国法院在反垄断民事诉讼中分配给原告的举证责任过重，不利于实现反垄断民事诉讼的目标。

Review of Distribution of Evidential Burden in China's Civil Action Against Monopoly:Taking Typical Cases as the Research Sample

The success rate of the plaintiff is very low in civil action against monopoly in our country,and the basic reason lies in the difficulty of the plaintiff's proof.This is directly related to the distribution of burden of proof in China's anti-monopoly civil action.Since anti-monopoly civil litigation is special,the general law of distribution of burden of proof in civil litigation cannot be applied.Instead,the system of inversion of burden of proof should be implemented to distribute part of burden of proof,originally borne by the plaintiff,to the defendant."Anti-Monopoly Judicial Interpretation",issued by the Supreme people's Court,has given consideration to this,but it is still conservative and has limited effect on reducing the burden of proof of the plaintiff.In the two anti-monopoly cases of Qihoo company v.Tencent company and Ruibang Chung Wo co.,Ltd.v.Johnson & Johnson,it is shown that the burden of proof distributed to the plaintiff by our court in the anti-monopoly civil litigation is too heavy,which is not conducive to the realization of the goal of the anti-monopoly civil litigation.