Abstract：The Scope of appellate review is restricted by appellant's claim for amending or overruling the judgment of first instance in principle.Chinese appellate review functions as a second trial anda supervision over the trial of first instance, meanwhile the appellee is not vested with the right of incidental appeal.As a result, there are many exceptions to the principle above.The exceptions are stipulated in the second paragraph of Article 323 of the Judicial Interpretation of CCPL.However, no consensus has been achieved among the appellate judges on the application of the paragraph.The author aims to sum up the extent of the meaning of the paragraph and make the application of it predictable.The author also proposes to employ the incidental appeal system in CCPL which can be utilized to balance the parties'procedural autonomy and the function of error correction of appellate court.

　　Keyword：Scope of Appellate Review; Appellant's Claim; Incidental Appeal; Public Interests;

　　一、问题的提出

　　2018年1月23日, “电梯劝阻吸烟案”二审判决一经公布, 即在微博、微信等社交平台上引发热议。[1]但与民法学界、司法实务界、社会公众几乎一边倒的叫好、点赞不同, 民事诉讼法学界产生了明显分歧。[2]争论主要围绕二审法院能否在原审原告部分胜诉且仅有其上诉的情况下, 判决驳回其全部诉讼请求而展开。换言之, 二审法院能否通过改判, 致使上诉人处于较之一审判决更为不利的法律地位。不少学者对二审判决提出质疑, 认为该判决既违反当事人处分原则, 逾越二审审理范围的限制, 又违背上诉“禁止不利益变更原则”。


 

TAG标签： 二审审理范围     上诉请求     附带上诉