自《民法总则》将“绿色原则”确立为民法基本原则以来，“绿色价值”为民事主体从事民事行为的意思自治提供了方向指引。《民法典》延续“绿色原则”的民法基本原则地位的同时，为“绿色原则”向“绿色条款”扩张提供了具体法律规范的文本支撑，构筑了“绿色原则”在立法、司法、守法多层次的价值指引和原则要求。基于“绿色原则”的立法指引，从《民法典》合同编的“绿色条款”中可以延伸出“绿色附随义务”“绿色后合同义务”“绿色包装义务”等法定“绿色义务”，但是在合同解除制度、合同无效制度中“绿色原则”的贯穿实效尚不突出。通过对司法实践案例的实证分析，发现“绿色原则”的司法实践模式存在“作为单独裁判依据”“作为共同裁判依据”和“补强裁判说理”三种引证模式，在具体情形中则延伸出“无关争议焦点的引用”“作为合同无效依据”等多种具体情形。通过对案例的整理可以发现，“绿色原则”在司法实践中体现出理论层面的功能定位混淆，在实践层面则呈现出“违背法律位阶适用”“同案不同判”“原则内涵理解片面”“说理不充分不具针对性”和“恣意适用原则”等多种问题，阻滞了“绿色原则”立法目的和价值的实现。司法实践中“绿色原则”的适用之所以存在上述问题，根本原因在于原则的理论建构逻辑断裂、规范文本中立法目的表达不畅、裁判的个案处理方法失调三个层次。因此，为优化“绿色原则”在合同编领域的司法实践，应当基于理论逻辑拓宽“绿色原则”的解释路径，同时基于立法目的明晰“绿色原则”的司法适用规则，最后立足于原则功能优化司法实践中的个案处理。

Since the "General Principles of Civil Law" established the "green principle" as the basic principle of civil law, "green value" has provided direction for the autonomy of civil subjects to engage in civil behavior. While continuing the status of the "green principle" as the basic principle of civil law, the "Civil Code" provides the textual support of specific legal norms for the expansion of the "green principle" to the "green clause", and establishes the value guidelines and principle requirements of green principle’s widely use in legislation, judiciary and law-abiding. Based on the legislative guidelines of the "green principle", statutory "green obligations" such as "green collateral obligations", "green post-contract obligations" and "green packaging obligations" can be extended from the "green clauses" in the book of Contract of the “Civil Code". The penetration effect of the "green principle" in the system of contract rescission and contract invalidation is not yet prominent. Through the analysis and research of cases in judicial practice, this Dissertation found that the judicial practice mode of "green principle" has three citation modes: "as the basis for independent judgment", "as the basis for joint judgment" and "reinforcing the reasoning of judgment". In specific cases, it extends to a variety of specific situations such as “irrelevant citing to the focus of the dispute" and "as the basis for invalidation of the contract". Through the sorting of cases, it can be found that the "green principle" in judicial practice reflects the confusion of functional positioning at the theoretical level. While at the practical level, various problems such as "violation of application rules between principles and specific legal norms ", "different judgments between similar cases", and "one-sided understanding of the connotation of the principle", “insufficient reasoning and pertinence” and “capriciously use of green principle” have hindered the realization of the legislative purpose and value of the "green principle". The fundamental reasons for the above-mentioned problems in the application of the "green principle" in judicial practice lie in three reasons: the logical rupture of the theoretical construction of the principle, the poor expression of the legislative purpose in the normative text, and the disorder of the case-handling method of the adjudication. Therefore, in order to optimize the judicial practice of the "green principle" in the field of book of contract, firstly the interpretation path of the "green principle" should be broadened based on theoretical logic. Secondly the judicial application rules of the "green principle" should be clarified based on the legislative purpose. Lastly the judicial function should be optimized based on the principle function for case handling in practice.