Abstract: The amended Several Regulations on Evidence in Civil Litigation issued by the Supreme People’s Court in 2019 have not resolved the problem of “substituting trial by appraisal” in judicial practice. The constraints on the behaviors of judges are ignored, and excessive regulations on the behaviors of forensic appraisal institutions and litigants are set. As the dominant person in a lawsuit, a judge’s failure to review the appraisal matters, non-participation in the appraisal process and the focus on the form review of the appraisal opinions are the fundamental reasons causing the result of “substituting trial by appraisal”. The corresponding path and method should be followed by the involvement of judicial power in the appraisal process. To be specific, the identification of the facts should be taken as the center when the appraisal is initiated, and the parties shall undertake the burden of proof of “minimum evidence”, while the judge should accurately position the “specific issues” and determine the appraisal items through “party debate and functional review”. At the time of carrying out the appraisal, it is necessary to control the appraisal materials and the qualifications of appraisers. When reviewing the appraisal opinions, it should be considered whether the appraisal opinions and appraisal items, appraisal materials and appraisal basis, appraisal basis and appraisal reason conform to one another.

Key words: substituting trial by appraisal, appraisal item, major fact, appraisal opinion, compliance review

摘要： 2019年最高人民法院发布新修正的《关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》并未有效解决司法实践中的“以鉴代审”问题，其过多的规范司法鉴定机构以及诉讼当事人的行为，忽视了对法官行为的约束。法官作为诉讼的主导者，对鉴定事项的不审查、对鉴定过程的不参与以及对鉴定意见审查的形式化是造成“以鉴代审”的根本原因。审判权介入鉴定程序应当遵循相应的路径与方法，具体而言：鉴定启动时，要以要件事实的查明为中心，当事人需要承担“最低限度的证据”的证明责任，法官需要准确定位“专门性问题”，通过“当事人辩论＋职权审查”确定鉴定事项；鉴定进行时，应当对鉴定材料的认定及参与鉴定人资质的审查进行控制；鉴定意见审查时，应当考虑鉴定意见与鉴定事项、鉴定材料与鉴定依据、鉴定依据与鉴定理由之间能否相互符合、相互对应。

关键词: 以鉴代审, 鉴定事项, 要件事实, 鉴定意见, 符合性审查