作者：李凌
作者介绍：西南政法大学法学院副教授，法学博士
出版日期：2025年10月9日
内容提要 作为上诉的合法要件，上诉利益具有过滤不必要上诉的重要功能。我国立法采权利上诉制，并未规定上诉利益。但司法实践中不乏利用上诉利益进行裁判的案例，立法的缺位与理论的模糊导致了实践中上诉利益判断的标准模糊混乱以及结果存在矛盾。关于上诉利益的判断标准，理论上主要存在着旧实体不服说、形式不服说、折中说以及新实体不服说的争议。新实体不服说回归既判力的作用，同时能够利用形式不服说的手段对上诉利益进行判断，具有理论和操作上的双重优势。在新实体不服说下，应当先对重大利益进行前置判断，再对自己责任进行后置补充。在重大利益方面，通过原裁判确定的不利益和提起另诉的不利益细化认可上诉利益的情形；在自己责任方面，以当事人的行动和态度为基础明确否定上诉利益的情形。
关键词 上诉利益 新实体不服说 既判力 重大利益 自己责任
Abstract: As a legal requirement for appeal, the appellate interest has the important function of filtering unnecessary appeals. The legislation in China adopts the right-based appeal system without stipulating the requirement for appellate interest. There are many cases in judicial practice where appellate interest is applied in adjudication; however, the absence of legislative provisions and the vagueness of theory lead to the ambiguity of appellate interest judgment criteria and the contradiction of results. In theory, there are controversies over appellate interest judgment criteria, including old substantive disagreement theory, formal disagreement theory, compromise theory, and new substantive disagreement theory. The new substantive disagreement theory returns to the role of res judicata and can determine the appellate interest by means of formal disagreement theory, which has dual advantages in theory and application. Under the new substantive disagreement theory, a preliminary assessment of the significant interest should be conducted, followed by a supplementary review of self-responsibility. In terms of significant interest, circumstances for recognizing the appellate interest shall be refined through the disadvantage confirmed by the original judgment and the disadvantage of filing a new lawsuit. In terms of self-responsibility, circumstances for negating appellate interest are clearly defined based on the actions and attitudes of the parties.