民事证据的认定和运用贯穿于整个民事诉讼的过程中，对法官查明事实作出判决起到十分重要的作用。在与证据相关的法律法规不断完善的过程中，我国法院对如何正确看待和处理证据的诉求也逐渐增大。本文试图从结构化的角度来分析证据问题，正如每个证据自身存在不同的结构，每个案件也有不同的证据结构。证据结构是不同证据的构成，本质上是证据的搭配排列组合方式。在不同的诉讼阶段，案件的证据结构会发生或多或少的变化，原审证据结构是法官用来判断案件事实，再审证据结构则是用来判断原审是否存在问题，它们的功能是完全不同的。由于再审阶段证据结构的分析判断相对复杂，本文正是要站在法官的立场上对整个证据结构重新审视，针对这一阶段中法官如何吸收判断原审证据、原审证据能否跟再审证据结合起来形成新的证据体系进行分析。文章首先对证据的内涵和外延作出界定，对结构的定义进行明确，进而引出证据结构是结构内各个层次、要素、部分之间互相联系、互相作用的表现方式，是各部分、要素联结成统一整体的整体思维形式，为后文的案例与理论分析做铺垫；接着比较分析了原审与再审证据结构的不同，详细的阐明二者在时间、内容、判断结构上的区别，同时结合各地法院审判中的典型案例，将当前法院审判中对证据的处理分为直接采纳，重新判断与综合认定。通过介绍再审证据结构理论，将目前存在的继承说、独立评价说、再评价说进行比较分析、综合总结。文章的第二部分通过案例列举出证据结构中存在的若干问题，第四部分则提出案例中对应问题的解决方案，即在明确再审证据结构时，既要考虑原审对证据的判断，也要适当对旧证据进行再评价以及对新证据独立评价，尤其要注意对所有证据的综合评价。文章最后进一步强调了明确再审证据结构的意义，不仅能纠正法官对过往证据的偏见，还能增强其他主体的诉讼效率。本研究从法学与社会学的独特视角出发，通过对法院实践中判例的研究，可能会部分的反映证据结构对民事再审的影响，对当下民事诉讼中如何从审判公正的角度来考虑证据问题无疑具有重要的实践意义。

Civil evidence has been cognized and used throughout in the process of civil litigation, and it plays a very important role when the judge ascertains the facts. The legal laws and regulations have continuous improvement that we also should know more about how to treat the evidence correctly. This article tries to analyze the evidence from the perspective of structural analysis, as evidence have the structure, evidence of each case also has different structure. Structure of evidence is the composition of the different evidence, and it is essentially the collocation of evidence combination method. In different phases of litigation, evidence structure of the case will change more or less, the original structure of evidence is for the fact-finding, and retrial evidence structure is used to determine whether the original is argumentative, their functions are completely different. While the analysis of structure of evidence in civil retrial is relatively complex, this article tries to stand in the position of a judge to re-examine the evidence on the structure, analyze how to absorb the original evidence, whether the new evidence can combines with the original in this stage. Firstly, this paper define the concept of connotation and denotation of evidence, and specify the definition of the structure, illustrate that the structure of evidence is expression of an interaction of every part within the structure, the overall form of thinking by connect different elements into a unified whole, which paves the way for later cases and theoretical analysis. Then compare and analysis the different structure of original and retrial evidence, clarify the difference in time quantum, content and structure between them, meanwhile combine with typical cases in the court trial, divide the handling of evidence in the court into direct adoption, judgment and comprehensive identification. Through the introduction of the retrial evidence structure theory, to compare the inherit theory, independent evaluation theory, and revaluation theory. The second part of the article puts forward some problems existing in the evidence structure through a few cases. The fourth part puts forward the solution to the correspondence problem in the case. It means that we should not only consider the original judgment of the evidence, but also the revaluation of old evidence and independent evaluation of new evidence, especially pay attention to the comprehensive evaluation of all evidence. The final part emphasize the significance of retrial evidence structure, not only can correct the bias against the old evidence, but also enhance the litigation efficiency of other subjects. This research embarks from the unique perspective of jurisprudence and sociology, based on the research of court cases, may reflect some influence of the structure on the civil retrial, undoubtedly have important practical significance to consider problem from the perspective of justice in the current environment.