Abstract: Appraisal opinions assist in identifying specialized facts in litigation, protecting the parties’ rights to question and defend, and clarifying the correct distinction between the functions of forensic appraisal and judicial adjudication. However, as all litigants’ understanding of forensic appraisal increases, the phenomenon of “generalized appraisal” has become more pronounced in practice. Forensic appraisal gradually replaces judicial decisions in some cases. Meanwhile, there is a lack of effective cross-examination of appraisal opinions in litigation, and prosecuting agencies sometimes substitute thorough reasoning and analysis with repeated appraisals. This results in forensic appraisals exceeding their technical boundaries and encroaching on matters that should be decided by courts. Undoubtedly, this undermines judicial authority and fairness. Of course, the causes of this problem are multifaceted, including factors related to the users of appraisal opinions, the quality of appraisers themselves, as well as imperfections in litigation and appraisal rules. To prevent such problems, it is necessary to strengthen the reasoning in judicial documents when adopting appraisal opinions, improve appraisal and litigation rules, and establish a sound case guidance system. These measures will comprehensively clarify the use of appraisal opinions from the root, throughout the process, and from a preventive perspective, ensuring that appraisal opinions carry out true evidential effect within the appraisers’ professional scope.

Key words: appraisal opinion, judicial function, technical boundary, adjudicative function

摘要： 鉴定意见有助于诉讼中专门性事实的认定、当事人质证权的保障，也有助于司法鉴定职能与审判职能的正确区分。但随着诉讼各方对司法鉴定认识的逐步深入，发现实践中“泛鉴定化”现象愈发明显，司法鉴定有逐步替代裁判的倾向，同时在诉讼中各方缺乏对鉴定意见的有效质证，办案机关也通过反复鉴定的方式来代替论证等，进而产生司法鉴定逾越技术边界，侵入本该由裁判决定的事项，这无疑有损司法权威和司法公正。当然，产生这一问题的原因是多方面的，既包括鉴定意见使用者、鉴定人自身素养等方面的因素，也包括诉讼规则与鉴定规则不完善等方面的因素。要杜绝此类问题的发生，有必要通过强化裁判文书对采纳鉴定意见的说理，完善鉴定和诉讼规则，健全案例指导制度等，从源头、过程、预防等角度进行全面厘定，确保鉴定意见在其自身专业范围内发挥真正的证据效能。

关键词: 鉴定意见, 审判职能, 技术边界, 裁判职能