This HTML5 document contains 40 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
dbohttp://dbpedia.org/ontology/
foafhttp://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
dbpedia-kohttp://ko.dbpedia.org/resource/
n18https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
dbthttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
freebasehttp://rdf.freebase.com/ns/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
wikipedia-enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbpedia-zhhttp://zh.dbpedia.org/resource/
dbphttp://dbpedia.org/property/
provhttp://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
dbchttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
goldhttp://purl.org/linguistics/gold/
wikidatahttp://www.wikidata.org/entity/
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/

Statements

Subject Item
dbr:Judgment_notwithstanding_verdict
rdfs:label
평결불복판결 逕為判決 Judgment notwithstanding verdict
rdfs:comment
Judgment notwithstanding the verdict, also called judgment non obstante veredicto, or JNOV, is a type of judgment as a matter of law that is sometimes rendered at the conclusion of a jury trial. In U.S. federal civil court cases, the term has been replaced by the renewed judgment as a matter of law, which emphasizes its relationship to the judgment as a matter of law, formerly called a directed verdict. In U.S. federal criminal cases, the term is "judgment of acquittal". 逕為判決（簡稱 JNOV、拉丁語：Judgement Non Obstante Veredicto；judgment notwithstanding verdict），是指美国法院的民事案件中，法官推翻陪審團判決並推翻或修正陪審團認定(verdict)的情况。於民事案件，逕為判決允許法官修改或替代那些没有法律根据的判決，但是敗訴律師请求的逕為判決只有在很少情况下会被法官接受。通常只有在賠償金額明顯過高、极为不合理或者完全不為法律支持時，逕為判決才会被接受。在刑事案件，只有被告可以申請逕為判決。參美國憲法第七修正案。該法規定，陪審團認定之事實，非依普通法之原則，不得為任何美國法院重新檢視。第七修正案是美國民權法案的一部份，是為了反應英國殖民法院經常推翻殖民地陪審團認定而设立的。 평결불복판결(JNOV:judgment notwithstanding verdict)은 배심원의 평결을 판사가 뒤집는 결정을 하는 것을 말한다. 실제로 배심원 평결과 상반된 판결이 나올 가능성은 매우 낮으며 미국 배심원 판결은 ‘자의적이고 독단적이지 않은 이상’ 배심원 평결을 따르고 있다.심원의 평결시 배심의 평결에 의해 패소한 자는 자신의 소송대리인을 통해 담당법관이 배심원의 판단과 다른 평결파기판결을 해줄 것을 최종적으로 신청할 수 있다. 배심원이 내리는 평결은 대체로 이성적이고 사실에 기초한 법적 결론이라고 추정되지만, 이 추정이 합당하지 못한 경우 패소자는 평결 10일 이내에 평결파기판결을 신청할 수 있으며 패소자의 평결파기판결(JNOV) 신청이 있으면, 판사는 배심원에게 제시된 사실 및 증거를 원고에 유리한 쪽으로 해석한 후 비이성적 인 배심원 평결이었다고 판단할 경우에만 배심원 평결을 파기하는 권한을 보유한다.
dcterms:subject
dbc:Law_of_the_United_States
dbo:wikiPageID
170446
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
1091903183
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:Civil_law_(common_law) dbr:Acquittal dbr:Motion_to_set_aside_judgment dbr:Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Renewed_judgment_as_a_matter_of_law dbr:Jury_trial dbr:United_States dbr:Sixth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Judge dbr:Jury dbr:Judgment_as_a_matter_of_law dbr:Directed_verdict dbr:Trial_by_jury dbr:Jury_nullification dbr:Court dbc:Law_of_the_United_States
owl:sameAs
dbpedia-zh:逕為判決 dbpedia-ko:평결불복판결 wikidata:Q5354219 freebase:m.016vhf n18:4jgEf
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dbt:Short_description dbt:Reflist dbt:US-law-stub
dbo:abstract
평결불복판결(JNOV:judgment notwithstanding verdict)은 배심원의 평결을 판사가 뒤집는 결정을 하는 것을 말한다. 실제로 배심원 평결과 상반된 판결이 나올 가능성은 매우 낮으며 미국 배심원 판결은 ‘자의적이고 독단적이지 않은 이상’ 배심원 평결을 따르고 있다.심원의 평결시 배심의 평결에 의해 패소한 자는 자신의 소송대리인을 통해 담당법관이 배심원의 판단과 다른 평결파기판결을 해줄 것을 최종적으로 신청할 수 있다. 배심원이 내리는 평결은 대체로 이성적이고 사실에 기초한 법적 결론이라고 추정되지만, 이 추정이 합당하지 못한 경우 패소자는 평결 10일 이내에 평결파기판결을 신청할 수 있으며 패소자의 평결파기판결(JNOV) 신청이 있으면, 판사는 배심원에게 제시된 사실 및 증거를 원고에 유리한 쪽으로 해석한 후 비이성적 인 배심원 평결이었다고 판단할 경우에만 배심원 평결을 파기하는 권한을 보유한다. 逕為判決（簡稱 JNOV、拉丁語：Judgement Non Obstante Veredicto；judgment notwithstanding verdict），是指美国法院的民事案件中，法官推翻陪審團判決並推翻或修正陪審團認定(verdict)的情况。於民事案件，逕為判決允許法官修改或替代那些没有法律根据的判決，但是敗訴律師请求的逕為判決只有在很少情况下会被法官接受。通常只有在賠償金額明顯過高、极为不合理或者完全不為法律支持時，逕為判決才会被接受。在刑事案件，只有被告可以申請逕為判決。參美國憲法第七修正案。該法規定，陪審團認定之事實，非依普通法之原則，不得為任何美國法院重新檢視。第七修正案是美國民權法案的一部份，是為了反應英國殖民法院經常推翻殖民地陪審團認定而设立的。 Judgment notwithstanding the verdict, also called judgment non obstante veredicto, or JNOV, is a type of judgment as a matter of law that is sometimes rendered at the conclusion of a jury trial. In U.S. federal civil court cases, the term has been replaced by the renewed judgment as a matter of law, which emphasizes its relationship to the judgment as a matter of law, formerly called a directed verdict. In U.S. federal criminal cases, the term is "judgment of acquittal". In American courts, JNOV is the practice whereby the presiding judge in a civil jury trial may overrule the decision of a jury and reverse or amend their verdict. In literal terms, the judge enters a judgment notwithstanding the jury verdict. The rarely-granted intervention permits the judge to exercise discretion to avoid extreme and unreasonable jury decisions. A judge may not enter a JNOV of "guilty" following a jury acquittal in United States criminal cases. Such an action would violate a defendant's Fifth Amendment right not to be placed in double jeopardy and Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury. If the judge grants a motion to set aside judgment after the jury convicts, however, the action may be reversed on appeal by the prosecution. A JNOV is appropriate only if the judge determines that no reasonable jury could have reached the given verdict. For example, if a party enters no evidence on an essential element of his case but the jury still finds in his favor, the court may rule that no reasonable jury would have disregarded the lack of evidence on that key point and reform the judgment. The reversal of a jury's verdict by a judge occurs when the judge believes that there were insufficient facts on which to base the jury's verdict or that the verdict did not correctly apply the law. That procedure is similar to a situation in which a judge orders a jury to arrive at a particular verdict, called a directed verdict. A judgment notwithstanding the verdict is occasionally made when a jury refuses to follow a judge's instruction to arrive at a certain verdict.
gold:hypernym
dbr:Judgment
prov:wasDerivedFrom
wikipedia-en:Judgment_notwithstanding_verdict?oldid=1091903183&ns=0
dbo:wikiPageLength
2848
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
wikipedia-en:Judgment_notwithstanding_verdict