摘要： 一审胜诉方因不服裁判理由提起的民事上诉，权利上诉制认为应当受理并实质审理，许可上诉制认为缺乏上诉利益应裁定驳回。两种上诉受理机制的理论基础差异，在于上诉法院的功能定位是全面监督一审裁判抑或救济当事人的实体权利、裁判理由的效力范围会扩张到后诉抑或仅限于本案。不同的上诉受理机制对应着不同的上诉审理制度。我国民事上诉的理论基础和相关制度与大陆法系更为接近，因此应采取许可上诉制，并采形式不服说作为上诉利益的判断标准，仅就裁判理由上诉的应裁定驳回。

关键词: 裁判理由, 权利上诉, 许可上诉, 上诉利益

Abstract: To deal with an appeal by the full winner of the first instance for objection to a referee's grounds, the Rightful Appellate System will accept it and try it in substance, while the Permissive Appellate System will rule it out for lack of Appealable Interest.The theoretical foundations of the two mechanisms of appellate admissibility are different.Under Rightful Appellate System, the function of appellate court is to supervise judgments of the first instance and the referee's reasons are only valid in this single case.But for Permissive Appellate System, appellate court is to provide legal remedy for the parties, and the reasons of referee will affect all subsequent litigations.Also, the Appellate Procedures correspond to appellate admissibility mechanisms.The relevant systems in China are similar to the Civil Law System, so Permissive Appellate System should be adopted, and Appealable Interest exists when the judgment results damage substantive rights of the parties.In conclusion, appeals only on the grounds of referee shall be rejected.

Key words: The Grounds of Referee, Rightful Appellate System, Permissive Appellate System, Appealable Interest