我国《民事诉讼法》明确将当事人陈述作为八大证据之一,但是由于当事人陈述本身虚实同在,真伪并存的特征,导致其在审判实践中的适用率极低。究其原因大致为我国复杂的审判制度背景和没有区分作为当事人“主张”和辩论的陈述与作为证据的当事人陈述。本文试从分析德国当事人陈述制度产生的制度原理,结合我国审判实践提出更好的使用当事人陈述这一证据的建议。 China’s “Civil Procedure Law” clearly regards the parties ’statements as one of the eight major evidences. However, due to the fact that the parties’ statements are both true and false and true and false, their applicability in trial practice is extremely low. The reason is roughly the background of our complicated judicial system and the fact that there is no distinction between the statements of the parties and the arguments and the statements of the parties as evidence. This paper attempts to analyze the system principle of the statement made by the German parties and put forward suggestions on how to use the evidence presented by the parties in combination with our trial practice.