我国法院调解实务中存在着调解诉讼化的倾向。为了解决调解诉讼化的问题,有学者提出了构建当事人主义调解结构的观点。但是,该观点混淆了法院调解与诉讼和解的界限,还存在将诉讼中的当事人主义理念强加于调解程序的问题。“合意—判定”型调解程序可以实现纠纷的妥当解决,为强制性的存在提供了正当化契机,契合了ADR的连续性理论。美国、日本等国家的法院调解即“合意—判定”型的程序构造。因此,我国也应当从构建“合意—判定”型调解程序的角度解决法院调解诉讼化的倾向问题。 There is a tendency to mediate litigation in the practice of court mediation in our country. In order to solve the problem of mediation litigation, some scholars put forward the view of constructing the mediation structure of adversaryism. However, this view obscures the line between the conciliation of the court and the settlement of the litigation. There is also the problem of imposing the concept of advocacy in litigation on the conciliation proceedings. “Consensus - Judgments ” conciliation procedure can solve the dispute properly, provide the legitimacy opportunity for the existence of compulsion, and fit the continuity theory of ADR. The mediation of the courts in the United States, Japan and other countries is the procedural structure of “consensus-judgment”. Therefore, our country should also solve the tendency of the courts to mediate the suit of litigation from the perspective of establishing a conciliation-judgment type conciliation procedure.