目的︰比較精神鑑定中醫師之結論與法庭判決結果之一致率。方法︰選取民國81至83年3年間於省立桃園療養院實施精神鑑定之個案，索取法院判決書與鑑定報告書分析比較。結果︰179例樣本中，民事案件95例，其中最多為禁治產宣告共90例（94.7%），診斷以智能不足最多共38例（40.0%）；刑事案件84例，其中竊盜罪最多共23例(27.4%），診斷以精神分裂症最多共29例（34.5%）。一致率︰民事案件為100%，刑事案件為93.6%。結論︰結果呈現極高的一致率，顯示可能隨著社會之演進，對精神與心理專業的需求與素質要求亦日趨升高，精神科醫師除努力加強專業、發展具鑑定特異性的評估技巧、評量工具外，充實法律知識、加強與法界專業人士之溝通與合作亦屬必需。研究的結果應可作為醫師、法官重要的參考資料，對於醫師所關注之精神病人權益、法官所關注社會安全與正義之維護提供了溝通的切入點；從這些資料可推演出來的「刑責能力判定準則」，將更具有參考價值。未來相關研究應加入法官意見之訪查，以反映法界觀點。

　　　　　Objective: Study of the consistency rate between the psychiatrist's judgment and the court sentences in forensic psychiatric evaluation (FPE). Methods: Analysis of the 179 FPE case records of a provincial psychiatric hospital over a 3-year period and court sentences of these cases. Results: These were 95 civil cases and 84 criminal cases. Among civil cases, 40.0% were mental retardation, 94.7% for interdiction. Among criminal cases, 34.5% were schizophrenia, 27.4% for larceny. Consistency rates between the psychiatrist's judgment and court sentences were 100% for civil cases and 93.6% for criminal cases. Conclusion: the results of the study provide an FPE reference for psychiatrists and data for judges which may be used to establish a starting point for communication about patients' rights and social safety which are joint concerns of both psychiatrists and judges as well as society as a whole. These results may also be useful in developing a criteria for criminal responsibility.