Review

Annotation. The article carries out a systematic and comparative analysis of doctrinal approaches to the definition of the concept of evidence and proof in criminal and civil processes, as well as an analysis of the legal norms of the criminal procedural and civil procedural codes, which define the concepts of evidence and proof. The purpose of this publication is a comparative analysis of evidences and proving in criminal and civil processes and the author’s development of the structure and content of evidence in criminal and civil processes based on the analysis of various doctrinal approaches to their understanding in the said processes. The article proves that, in general, the construction of Art. 84 of the current Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine and Art. 64 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine of 1960 are very similar, which gives some scientists grounds to unreasonably believe that the legislator left an information model of evidence based on the theory of reflection in the current Criminal Code of Ukraine. The author analyzes various concepts of evidence and proof in the modern theory of criminal procedural evidence and concludes that the most well-founded and the one that corresponds to both the epistemological and legal nature of court evidence is the concept according to which court evidence, being a category of objective-sub objective, represents the unity of factual data, their procedural sources and procedural form, which can be recognized as evidence itself only when it is recognized as such by the relevant subject of evidence or the court. In a specific criminal proceeding, evidence can be recognized as evidence itself if it meets such properties as propriety and admissibility. On the basis of a comparative analysis of doctrinal approaches to the definition of the concept of proof in the criminal process, the author concludes that, based on epistemology, logic, psychology, the theory of proof activity in the criminal process, the most well-founded concept of proof, which is based on the principles of the domestic criminal process and meets the needs of practice, is the concept, which defines criminal procedural evidence as the process of obtaining evidence and substantiating by it the subject of evidence and the court of its legal position and relevant decisions in criminal proceedings in accordance with its competence. The work reveals the content of obtaining evidence and substantiating its legal position and relevant decisions by the subject of evidence and the court. Analyzing doctrinal approaches to defining the concept and content of evidence and proof in a civil process in a comparative aspect with doctrinal approaches to defining the concept and content of evidence and proof in a criminal process, the author concludes that the terms «proof» and «proof» used in the theory of civil the process by individual scientists as different categories with different meanings are actually synonyms in the Ukrainian language. The author justifies that the fundamental categories of «evidence» and «proof» need unification at the doctrinal level, in the educational process and, accordingly, in the CPC and in the CPC of Ukraine, because from the point of view of epistemology, logic, theory of activity, psychology and law, evidence and proof in criminal and civil processes essentially have the same meaning. At the same time, the difference, in particular, of proof in criminal and civil processes lies in the object, purpose, tasks, means of proof and the legal status of the subjects of proof. Key words: evidence, proving, criminal process, civil process, criminal procedural legislation, civil procedural legislation. REFERENCES LIST OF LEGAL DOCUMENTS LEGISLATION REFERENCES BIBLIOGRAPHY AUTHORED BOOKS

1. Hmyrko V, Kryminalno-protsesualni dokazy: poniattia, struktura, kharakterystyky, klasyfikatsiia [Criminal procedural evidence: concept, structure, characteristics, classification] (Dnipropetrovsk, Akademiia mytnoi sluzhby Ukrainy, 2002) 63, 15 [in Ukrainian].
2. Honcharenko V H, Nor V T, Shumylo M Ye, Kryminalnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy. Naukovopraktychnyi komentar [Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. Scientific and practical commentary] (Kyiv, Yustinian, 2012) 223 [in Ukrainian].
3. Komarov V V, Barankova V V, Notariat v Ukrainy [Notary in Ukraine] (Kharkiv, Pravo, 2011) 96 [in Ukrainian].
4. Konverskyi A Ye, Lohika [Logic] (Kyiv, Tsentr uchbovoi literatury, 2017) 391–399 [in Ukrainian].
5. Kucher T M, Dokazy, dokazuvannia ta dovedennia u tsyvilistychnomu protsesi Ukrainy [Evidence, proving and proving in the civil process of Ukraine] (Kyiv, Vydavets Pozdnyshev Ye V, 2015) 448 [in Ukrainian].
6. Pohoretskyi M A, Funktsionalne pryznachennia operatyvno-rozshukovoi diialnosti u kryminalnomu protsesi [Functional assignment of investigative activity in the criminal process] (Kharkiv, Arsis LTD, 2007) 576 [in Ukrainian].
7. Pohoretskyi M A, Kryminalnyi protses [Criminal process] Velyka ukrainska yurydychna entsyklopediia: u 20 t. (Kharkiv, Pravo, 2016) T.19: Kryminalnyi protses, sudoustrii, prokuratura ta advokatura / redkol.: V. T. Nor (holova) ta in. (Nats. akad. prav. nauk. Ukrainy; In-t derzhavy i prava im. V. M. Koretskoho NAN Ukrainy; Nats. yuryd. un-t im. Yaroslava Mudroho, 2020) 468 [in Ukrainian].
8. Vapniarchuk V V, Teoriia i praktyka kryminalnoho protsesualnoho dokazuvannia [Theory and practice of criminal procedural evidence] (Kharkiv, Yurait, 2017) 12–35 [in Ukrainian]
9. Fursa S Ya, Tsiura T V, Dokazy i dokazuvannia u tsyvilnomu protsesi [Evidence and evidence in civil proceedings] (Kyiv, 2005) 14 [in Ukrainian].
10. Fursa S Ya, Teoriia notarialnoho protsesu [Theory of the notarial process] (Kyiv, Alerta, 2012) 233 [in Ukrainian].
11. Shtefan M Y, Tsyvilnyi protses [Civil process] (Kyiv, Yurinkom Inter, 2001) 696 [in Ukrainian].
12. Tertyshnikov V I, Tsyvilnyi protses Ukrainy [Civil process of Ukraine] (Kharkiv, Yurait, 2015) 134 [in Ukrainian].
13. Zviahyntseva L M, Pliukhyna M A, Reshetnykova Y V, Dokaz’vanye v sudebnoi praktyke po hrazhdanskym delam [Evidence in judicial practice in civil cases] (Moskva, Norma, 2000) 3 [in Russian].

CONFERENCE PAPERS

1. Pohoretskyi M A, Aktualni pytannia teorii dokaziv [Current issues of the theory of evidence] Dokazy i dokazuvannia za novym Kryminalnym protsesualnym kodeksom Ukrainy (do 75-richchia z dnia narodzhennia doktora yurydychnykh nauk, profesora Mykhaila Makarovycha Mykheienka): materialy mizhnarodnoi naukovopraktychnoi konferentsii [Current issues of the theory of evidence] (6–7 hrudnia 2012 r., m. Kyiv) / Strokov D V (Kharkiv, Vydavets, 2013) 15–22 [in Ukrainian].
2. Pohoretskyi M A, Dokazuvannia u kryminalnomu protsesi: poniattia, zmist, struktura [Evidence in the criminal process: concept, content, structure] Aktualni problemy dokazuvannia u kryminalnomu provadzhenni: materialy Vseukrainskoi naukovo-praktychnoi Internet-konferentsii [Evidence in the criminal process: concept, content, structure] (27 lystopada 2013 r., m. Odesa) / Alenin Yu P (Odesa, Yurydychna literatura, 2013) 17–21 [in Ukrainian].
3. Pohoretskyi M A, Nova kontseptsiia kryminalnoho protsesualnoho dokazuvannia ta yii realizatsiia v chynnomu KPK Ukrainy [The new concept of criminal procedural evidence and its implementation in the current Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine] Aktualni pytannia dokazuvannia u kryminalnomu protsesi: zbirnyk materialiv naukovo-praktychnoi konferentsii (m. Kyiv, 27 liutoho 2015 roku) (Kyiv, Vydavets, 2015) 22–27 [in Ukrainian].
4. Pohoretskyi M A, Suchasni kontseptsii kryminalnoho protsesualnoho dokazuvannia [Modern concepts of criminal procedural evidence] Suchasni tendentsii rozvytku kryminalistyky ta kryminalnoho protsesu: tezy dop. mizhnar. nauk. – prakt. konf. do 100-richchia vid dnia narodzhennia prof. M. V. Saltevskoho (m. Kharkiv, 8 lystop. 2017 r.) (Kharkiv, MVS Ukrainy, 2017) 309–312 [in Ukrainian].

DISSERTATIONS

1. Hevko V V, Yspolzovanye neprotsessualnoi ynformatsyy vo vremia dokaz’vanyia v stadyy predvarytelnoho rassledovanyia [Use of non-procedural information during evidence at the preliminary investigation stage] (avtoref. dys. … kand. yuryd. nauk. Kyiv, 1996) 10 [in Russian].
2. Kucher T M, Teoriia dovedennia u tsyvilistychnomu protsesi [The theory of proof in the civil process] (avtoref. dys. … dok. yuryd. nauk. Kyiv, 2017) 44 [in Ukrainian].
3. Tatarov L A, Metodycheskye y metodolohycheskye problemi dokazivanyia obstoiatelstv prestuplenyia [Methodical and methodological problems of proving the circumstances of the crime] (avtoref. dys. …kand. yuryd. nauk, Rostov n/D, 2006) 8, 13 [in Russian].

ARTICLES

1. Fursa S Ya, Formuvannia doktryny pro vykonavchyi protses ta instytut dokaziv v Ukraini [Formation of the doctrine on the executive process and the institution of evidence in Ukraine] (2012) Problemy teorii i praktyky vykonannia rishen sudiv ta inshykh orhaniv 17–29 [in Ukrainian].
2. Kucher T M, Teoretychni osnovy protsesu dokazuvannia u tsyvilnomu sudochynstvi Ukrainy [Theoretical foundations of the process of proof in civil justice of Ukraine] (2012) 2 Chasopys Kyivskoho universytetu prava 167–170 [in Ukrainian].
3. Pohoretskyi M A, Dokazy u kryminalnomu protsesi [Evidence in criminal proceedings] (2003) 2 Visnyk prokuratury 59–65 [in Ukrainian].
4. Pohoretskyi M A, Spivvidnoshennia piznannia i dokazuvannia u kryminalnomu protsesi ta mistse v nykh operatyvno-rozshukovoi diialnosti [Correlation of knowledge and evidence in the criminal process and the place of investigative activity in them] (2003) 7 Pytannia borotby zi zlochynnistiu 114–132 [in Ukrainian].
5. Pohoretskyi M A, Pro spivvidnoshennia dzherel faktychnykh danykh i dzherel dokaziv u kryminalnomu protsesi [On the ratio of sources of factual data and sources of evidence in the criminal process] (2009) 1 Pravo Ukrainy 80–85 [in Ukrainian].
6. Pohoretskyi M A, Teoriia vidbyttia ta yii znachennia dlia piznannia obstavyn zlochynu [The theory of reflection and its significance for understanding the circumstances of a crime] (2010) 1 (7) Yuryd. psykholohiia ta pedahohika 69–78 [in Ukrainian].
7. Pohoretskyi M A, Dokazy u kryminalnomu protsesi: problemni pytannia [Evidence in criminal proceedings: problematic issues] (2011) 1 (3) Chasopys Natsionalnoho universytetu «Ostrozka akademiia». Seriia: Pravo data zvernennia 09.05.2022 [in Ukrainian].
8. Pohoretskyi M A, Novely proektu novoho KPK Ukrainy i problemy yikh relazatsii u pravozastosovnii diialnosti [Amendments to the project of the new Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine and the problems of their implementation in law enforcement activities] (2012) 1 (27) Borotba z orhanizovanoiu zlochynnistiu i koruptsiieiu (teoriia i praktyka) 208–216 [in Ukrainian].
9. Pohoretskyi M A, Kryminalno-protsesualna forma [Criminal procedural form] (2012) 2 Visnyk Zaporizkoho yurydychnoho instytutu DDUVS 144–151 [in Ukrainian].
10. Pohoretskyi M, Teoriia kryminalnoho protsesualnoho dokazuvannia: problemni pytannia [Theory of criminal procedural evidence: problematic issues] (2014) 10 Pravo Ukrainy 12–25 [in Ukrainian].
11. Pohoretskyi M A, Nova kontseptsiia kryminalnoho protsesualnoho dokazuvannia [A new concept of criminal procedural evidence] (2015) 3 Visnyk kryminalnoho sudochynstva Ukrainy 63–79 [in Ukrainian].
12. Pohoretskyi M A, P’iat rokiv chynnosti kryminalnoho protsesualnoho kodeksu: uroky dlia pravotvorchoi diialnosti [Five years of the Criminal Procedure Code: lessons for law-making] (2017) 3 Visnyk kryminalnoho sudochynstva 11–27 [in Ukrainian].
13. Pohoretskyi M A, Kryminalnyi protses: poniattia ta yoho metodolohichne i praktychne znachennia [Criminal process: the concept and its methodological and practical significance] (2021) 3–4 Visnyk kryminalnoho sudochynstva 88–93 [in Ukrainian].
14. Pohoretskyi M A, Kryminalnyi protses: poniattia ta yoho naukove i praktychne znachennia [Criminal process: the concept and its scientific and practical significance] (2021) 1–2 Visnyk kryminalnoho sudochynstva 28–51 [in Ukrainian].
15. Saltievskyi M, Shche raz pro poniattia dokaziv u proekti KPK Ukrainy [Once again about the concept of evidence in the draft CPC of Ukraine] (2000) 11 Pravo Ukrainy 64–66 [in Ukrainian].
16. Serhieieva D B, Dopustymist dokaziv v teorii ta KPK 2012 roku [Admissibility of evidence in theory and CPC of 2012] (2015) 3 Visnyk kryminalnoho sudochynstva 80–87 [in Ukrainian].
17. Serhieieva D B, Nalezhnist dokaziv za novym KPK Ukrainy [Adequacy of evidence under the new Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine] (2013) 3 (32) Borotba z orhanizovanoiu zlochynnistiu i koruptsiieiu (teoriia i praktyka) 234–239 [in Ukrainian].
18. Tertyshnikov V, Dokazy yak instrument sudovoho dokazuvannia u tsyvilnomu protsesi [Evidence as a tool of judicial evidence in civil proceedings] (2011) 10 Pravo Ukrainy 78 [in Ukrainian].
19. Vynohradova A I, Dokazuvannia u tsyvilnomu protsesi: do vyznachennia struktury ta zmistu [Evidence in civil proceedings: to determine the structure and content] (2020) 3–4 Visnyk kryminalnoho sudochynstva 140–148 [in Ukrainian].