Abstract: At present, there are conflicting provisions of relevant judicial construction in China on the decision of the fact. And despite the fact that the relevant provisions represented by Article 9 of the “Rules of Evidence”, which has the effect of predetermined weight of the judgment, there exist many problems that are unworthy of the name and can easily lead to the application of the conflict. However, after being transformed by Chinas “specialization”, they have been accepted by judges at the forefront of judiciary practice. If these provisions are casually and completely negated, and further replaced by the newlyintroduced, then it may cause the inconsistence with the existing legal system in China. Therefore, it should be on the basis of clarifying the predetermined weight of res judicata theory and other relations, and actively docking the latest legal provisions on the validity of predetermined weight and positive res judicata, to make unified interpretations in the same civil action legal system.

Key words: determined fact, predetermined weight, issue preclusion validity, positive res judicata

摘要： 目前我国相关司法解释在关于已决事实效力的规定上存在相互冲突的问题，以《最高人民法院关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》第9条为代表的对已决事实预决效力的相关规定，虽存在名不副实且易造成适用冲突等诸多问题，但其在经过中国“特殊化”改造后，已为处于司法前线的法官所接受。若轻易将其全盘否定并引进新体系取而代之，则与我国现有法律体系不相适应。应在厘清预决效力与既判力等其他理论关系的基础上，对接有关预决效力与积极既判力的最新法律规定，力求能在同一民诉法律体系中统一解释。

关键词: 已决事实, 预决效力, 争点效, 积极既判力