少捕慎诉慎押刑事司法政策，是国家治理体系和治理能力现代化的时代要求，具有加强人权保障、促进社会经济健康发展、节约司法资源等重要实践价值。认罪认罚从宽制度要求司法机关对自愿认罪认罚的犯罪嫌疑人、被告人依法给予从宽处理，其普遍推行有利于及时有效地惩罚犯罪，加强人权司法保障，促进实现司法公正和司法效率有机统一。二者在精神内核上高度契合，对“从宽”的正确把握与适用有助于发挥少捕慎诉慎押刑事政策的实质效力，依法减少适用未决羁押。但司法实践中认罪认罚案件在未决羁押适用、羁押期限、审查机制等方面仍存在不少问题：羁押适用方面，认罪认罚对逮捕要件社会危险性的审查的影响不足，“构罪即捕”的理念尚未根除，实践中未尽可能地适用非羁押性强制措施以减少不必要的逮捕，导致未决羁押率仍处高位；羁押期限方面，“一押到底”“久押不决”做法屡禁不止，未决羁押期限普遍较长，不仅妨碍刑事诉讼顺利进行，更直接侵犯被羁押者的人身自由；审查方面，羁押必要性审查机制运行效果未达预期，对于及时变更、撤销不必要的羁押还有较大发展空间。

本文包括绪论、正文三个部分和结语。

绪论部分介绍了认罪认罚从宽制度和少捕慎诉慎押刑事政策的大背景，总结了国内刑事案件未决羁押实践现状、国内学者对改善认罪认罚案件未决羁押现状的观点以及国外辩诉交易背景下未决羁押相关的法规和学者观点，由此提出本文研究认罪认罚案件未决羁押的理论与实践意义。

正文第一部分介绍实证研究的样本来源、研究角度和计算方法，基于北京市D区裁判文书的统计数据，分析认罪认罚案件未决羁押在适用、时长和变更三个方面的司法实践现状。第二部分从实践和制度两个角度介绍认罪认罚从宽背景下未决羁押的主要问题，并尝试探究其内在原因。通过分析认罪认罚对社会危险性的影响从而探究如何充分发挥认罪认罚对“少捕”的带动作用，真正理清认罪认罚从宽与“少捕”的契合关系。第三部分阐述了对认罪认罚案件未决羁押问题及其完善路径的思考，在增强认罪认罚对认定社会危险性的影响的同时，完善未决羁押替代措施的适用条件和保障举措，以促进“少捕”理念在实践中的落实。

结语部分对认罪认罚案件未决羁押主要问题和改进建议进行归纳，并总结了本文研究的不足之处，结合少捕慎诉慎押刑事政策提出对认罪认罚案件未决羁押制度与实践的展望。

The policy of Fewer Arrest, Prudent Prosecution and Prudent Detention is required by the modernization of China's governance system and governance capability. It has important practical value in strengthening human rights protection, promoting healthy social and economic development, and saving judicial resources. The Leniency for Guilty Plea System requires judicial organs to give leniency to criminal suspects and defendants who voluntarily confess their crimes. Its widespread implementation is conducive to timely and effective punishment of crimes, strengthening judicial protection of human rights, and promoting the organic unity of judicial justice and judicial efficiency. The two are highly consistent in the spiritual core, and the correct grasp and application of "leniency" will help to exert the substantive effect of criminal justice policy of fewer Arrest, prudent prosecution and prudent detention, and reduce the application of pretrial-custody according to law. However, in judicial practice, there are still many problems in the application of pretrial-custody, period of detention, review mechanism, etc. In terms of the application of detention, the influence of guilty plea on the examination of the social risk of arrest is insufficient. The concept of "arrest is sufficient" has not been eradicated. In practice, non-custodial compulsory measures have not been applied as much as possible to reduce unnecessary arrests, leading to the high rate of pretrial-custody. In terms of the period of detention, the practice of " detention to the end" and "long period of detention"can't be stopped, and the period of pending detention is generally long, which not only hinders the smooth proceeding of criminal proceedings, but also directly infringes on the personal freedom of detainees. In terms of review, the operation effect of the review mechanism on the necessity of detention has not met expectations, and there is still large space for the timely change and cancellation of unnecessary detention.

This article includes introduction, three parts of the main body and conclusion.

The introduction part introduces the general background of leniency system of guilty plea and the policy of fewer arrest, prudent prosecution and prudent detention, summarizes the practice status of pretrial-custody in domestic criminal cases, domestic scholars' views on improving the current situation of pretrial-custody in guilty plea cases and foreign laws and regulations and scholars' views on pretrial-custody under the background of plea bargaining. Therefore, this article puts forward the theoretical and practical significance of studying the pretrial-custody in the case of guilty plea.

The first part of the main body introduces the sample source, research perspective and calculation method of the empirical research. Based on the statistical data of the judgment documents in D area, it analyzes the judicial practice status of the pretrial-custody in the application, duration and change of the guilty plea case. The second part introduces the main problems of pretrial-custody under the background of leniency of guilty plea from the perspective of practice and system, and tries to analyze the internal reasons. It explores how to give full play to the driving effect of guilty plea on "less arrest" by analyzing the influence of guilty plea on social risk, and really clarifies the fit relationship between leniency and less arrest. The third part elaborates on the pretrial-custody of guilty plea cases and its improvement path. While enhancing the influence of guilty plea on the identification of social risk, the application conditions and safeguard measures of alternative measures of pretrial-custody are improved, so as to promote the implementation of the concept of "less arrest" in practice.

The conclusion summarizes the main problems and improvement suggestions of pretrial-custody in guilty plea cases, and summarizes the shortcomings of this article. Combined with the policy of fewer arrest, prudent prosecution and prudent detention, it puts forward the prospect of pretrial-custody system and practice in guilty plea cases.