摘要： 证明责任理论包含三个层次的方法论，即案件事实真伪不明时的裁判方法、证明责任分配方法及对这种分配规则的具体化与正当化方法。证明责任的实质是法律适用问题，而法律解释是法律适用的基础性作业，对实定法规范解释方法的选择不构成规范说的“本质缺陷”。《侵权责任法》第79条规定的动物致害案件可作为依“规范说”分配证明责任的一个适例而非反例。“规范说”与“修正规范说”存在着形式与实质的区别，但依两种理论分配证明责任的结果基本是一致的。尊重实体法的立法宗旨与目的以分配证明责任是两种学说一贯坚持的核心思想，也是该派学说与其他竞争性学说的本质区别。

关键词: 证明责任, 规范说, 修正规范说, 法律解释, 法律漏洞

Abstract: The burden of proof consists of three levels methodology:  the referee method to non-liquet, the burden of proof allocation method and specific and legitimate method to this allocation rule.The essence of the burden of proof is about legal application, and the interpretation of the law is the basic operations of legal application.The Article 79 of CHinese Fort Law does not constitute the essential defect of the Norm Theory.Animals Injuring case in“Chinese Tort Law”of legal interpretation is a case in point, rather than counter-examples on the burden of proof allocation according to Norm Theory.In many ways the difference between Norm Theory and Modified Norm Theory is about form and substance.And in the allocation of the burden of proof of the results, according to the two theories it is basically the same.To respect the legislative purpose and object of the substantive law to allocate the burden of proof is the core idea that two theories always insisted on, which is also the essential difference between this theory and other competitive theory.

Key words: Burden of Proof, Norm Theory, Modified Norm Theory, Legal Interpretation, Legal Loophole