摘要： 2012年修改的《民事诉讼法》第78条明定鉴定人不出庭作证的后果是：鉴定意见不得作为事实认定的根据、鉴定人返还鉴定费用。该规定忽视了鉴定人出庭作证的公法义务性质和鉴定的证据法构造。在民事诉讼中，出庭作证系鉴定人对代表国家行使裁判权的法院承担的诉讼法上的义务。基于该义务的公法性质，鉴定人不出庭作证应遭受罚款、拘留等公法上的制裁。考虑到鉴定人与证人诉讼地位的相似性，立法上应将鉴定人不出庭作证的后果一体适用于证人，这样才符合形式正义的要求。

关键词: 鉴定人, 出庭作证, 公法义务, 公法制裁, 形式正义

Abstract: According to Article 78 of PRC Civil Procedure amended in 2012,the consequences of the expert witness's non-appearance are the denial of the witness expert's opinion as the basis for fact finding and the restitution of the expert witness fees. However, such provision is not only contradictory to the expert witness's public law duty to appear, but also inconsistent with the structure of evidence law. It is even illogical. In civil action, serving as a witness in court-a duty under the procedural law-is for the expert witness to fulfill the requests of the court, which represents the state to exert the adjudicative power. Since the duty is arising from the public law, the non-appeared expert witness should be imposed on the public law sanctions, such as fine, detention, etc.. From the perspective of the jurispmdential methodology and legislative techniques, Article 78 of PRG Civil Procedure should not only provide that the non-appeared expert witness should be im-posed on those public law sanctions, but also articulate consequences of the expert witness's non-appearance, aiming at meeting the internal request of the doctrine of equity.

Key words: Expert Witnesses, Obligations of Appearing in Court, Public Law Obligation, Public Law Sanctions, Principle of Equality