【摘要】 在我国，法官释明的重要性已为立法与实务所肯认，但长期以来学界认为法官释明的主要场域为正式的开庭审理，对于以庭前会议为核心的审前准备程序中的释明少有论及。审判实务中庭前会议法官释明数量少、释明范围窄，仅集中于证据交换。作为实体审理的组成部分，庭前会议中法官的释明是协同主义诉讼模式的当然要求，也是实现以争点整理为核心的庭前会议功能的必然结果。庭前会议中法官的充分释明，能够使法官与当事人双方尽早明确事实关系与法律关系，从而实现充实、集中而富有效率的正式庭审，并有利于促成当事人和解。庭前会议中法官释明对象涵盖诉讼主体、诉讼请求、争议焦点与证据提出四大维度，释明范围包括积极释明与消极释明，释明方式应以对席为主。法官释明应覆盖庭前会议全过程。更多还原

【Abstract】 In China, the importance of the judge’s interpretation has been recognized by legislation and in practice. However, the academic community has believed that the main venue for this interpretation is the formal court hearings, and there is little discussion on the interpretation in the pretrial preparation procedures centering around the pretrial conference. In the judicial practice, the number of interpretations made by the judge at the pretrial conference is limited, the scope of interpretations is narrow, and only the evidence exchange is focused on. As an integral part of the substantive trial, the judicial interpretation of the judge at the pretrial conference is a natural requirement of the collaborative litigation model, and also an inevitable result of realizing the pretrial conference function centering on the sorting of points of contention. The full interpretation of the judge at the pretrial conference can enable the judge and the parties to clarify the factual and legal relationships as early as possible, thereby achieving a comprehensive, centralized, and efficient formal trial, and facilitating reconciliation between the parties. The objects of interpretation of the judge at the pretrial conference cover four dimensions: the litigation subject, the litigation request, the focus of dispute, and the presentation of evidence. The scope of interpretation includes the positive and negative interpretations, and the interpretation method should mainly be face-to-face. The judge’s interpretation should cover the entire process of pretrial conference.更多还原