The burden of proof in a criminal trial – a legal phenomenon, the essence of which is driven by interest in a particular subject procedural necessity of proof to defend their legal position by committing acts aimed at building the evidential basis and justification for its positive and attainable objective statements. A simple understanding of the nature of the burden of proof is a set of rules for the distribution between actors of their obligations to justify the presence of certain conditions. These rules are as follows: 1. Main (general) rule based logic to the current position of any dispute. Its meaning is that he who defends certain opinions must give his reasons. Pryminymo to proof, which means that anyone who puts a particular evidential thesis, should it prove. 2. The burden of proof, sometimes, can be moved on other subjects of criminal proceedings, including in the defense (and sometimes even on the subjects of criminal proceedings are not subject to proof, as are those that contribute to its implementation). Regarding the possible shifting of the burden of proving the substantive facts, we can assume the following possible cases of: 1) generated when the evidence base in one way or another party provides an opportunity to nominate a strong factual assumptions. In this case, the burden of proof (refutation of this assumption) is moved to the other side, and 2) when adequate evidence base as one, and the other party has not yet formed, but on the existence of certain facts can be expressed by certain legal presumption in favor of either party. In this case, the burden of rebuttal of the presumption may shift to the opposite side, and 3) when the other party is in a stronger position objectively, is the best possible proof of certain facts.
Regarding the possible shifting of the burden of proof of facts that are procedural value, the example is the provision of Part 2 of Article 92 and st.139 CCP.
Keywords: Criminal procedure of proof, the burden of proof, the burden of proof, responsibility, interest