彩礼作为中华民族特有的风俗习惯历经上千年的风雨涤荡却依然经久不衰，在历史的长河中熠熠生辉，对于民众生活所产生的影响也愈发深刻久远。民法作为调整平等主体之间财产关系与人身关系的重要法律却直至2003年才正式将其纳入到法律的调整范围。随着社会经济的快速发展模糊笼统的立法早已无法满足现实中司法实践的需求，亟需进行彩礼返还规则的修改与完善。因此笔者以所在家乡陕西省宝鸡市为研究对象，在北大法宝上搜集到了近三年来陕西省宝鸡市中级人民法院辖区下所有的彩礼纠纷案件，去除部分不合格的案例之后得到58个有效样本。笔者对这58个样本的案件审理程序、判决彩礼返还情况的结果、彩礼返还比例、诉讼主体与种类、过错与彩礼返还比例的关系等九大方面进行了整体的数据分析并指出了本地区彩礼纠纷案件审判中存在的不足，其中包括简易程序运用率过低、同案不同判现象突出、适用法律时过于机械、裁判结果与风俗习惯和民众认知相悖、个别案件没有依法裁判等。接着笔者将样本分为婚约财产纠纷和离婚诉讼引发的彩礼纠纷两种类型进行了横向的数据分析并讨论了在共同生活时间超过两年、男女双方生育有子女、彩礼在共同生活中消耗殆尽的情况下彩礼如何返还等焦点问题。本文从立法不足和司法困境两方面阐述了彩礼返还规则在立法和司法上所面临的双重问题，也相应提出了完善彩礼返还制度的对策。一方面是出台相关司法解释重构彩礼返还的情形，不论当事人是否登记结婚，在共同生活超过两年、生育有子女、彩礼在共同生活中消耗殆尽三种情形下都不予返还。在当事人完全没有共同生活的情况下，彩礼应该全部返还。在酌情返还时考虑共同生活时间的长短、双方当事人的过错情况、女方是否怀孕流产、女方对家庭付出的劳动义务和所尽的赡养扶养义务的多少、男方是否患有残疾、丧失劳动能力等因素来综合认定彩礼返还的比例；另一方面要注意结合当地风俗习惯平衡法律与习惯的冲突、大力发挥调解与和解的作用、出台相关指导意见、同时注意规制法官的自由裁量权。

As a unique custom of the Chinese nation, betrothal gifts are still enduring after thousands of years of wind and rain. They shine brightly in the long history and have a profound and long-term impact on people's life. As an important law to adjust the property relationship and personal relationship between equal subjects, civil law did not formally bring it into the scope of legal adjustment until 2003. With the rapid development of social economy, vague and general legislation has long been unable to meet the needs of judicial practice in reality, so it is urgent to modify and improve the return rules of betrothal gifts. Therefore, the author takes Baoji City in Shaanxi Province as the research object, collects all the betrothal gifts dispute cases under the jurisdiction of Baoji intermediate people's court in recent three years from the magic weapon of Peking University, and gets 58 effective samples after removing some unqualified cases. The author makes an overall data analysis on the nine aspects of the 58 samples, including the trial procedures, the results of the judgment on the return of betrothal gifts, the proportion of the return of betrothal gifts, the subjects and types of litigation, and the relationship between fault and the proportion of the return of betrothal gifts, and points out the shortcomings existing in the trial of betrothal gifts disputes in this region, including the low utilization rate of summary procedures, the prominent phenomenon of different judgments in the same case, and the lack of evidence The application of law is too mechanical, the result of judgment is contrary to customs and public cognition, and individual cases are not judged according to law. Then the author divides the sample into two types: the property dispute caused by engagement and the betrothal gift dispute caused by divorce litigation, makes a horizontal data analysis, and discusses the focus issues such as how to return the betrothal gift when they live together for more than two years, both men and women have children, and the betrothal gift is exhausted in common life.This paper expounds the double problems of the return of betrothal gifts in legislation and Judicature from two aspects of insufficient legislation and Judicial Dilemma, and puts forward the corresponding countermeasures to improve the return system of betrothal gifts. On the one hand, the relevant judicial interpretation is issued to reconstruct the situation of the return of betrothal gifts. No matter whether the parties are registered for marriage or not, they will not return the betrothal gifts in the three situations of living together for more than two years, having children and exhausting the betrothal gifts in common life. In the case that the parties do not live together, the betrothal gifts should be returned in full. The proportion of betrothal gifts returned is determined by considering the length of time of living together, the fault of both parties, whether the woman is pregnant or miscarriage, the amount of labor obligations and support obligations paid by the woman to the family, whether the man has disability, loss of working ability and other factors; On the other hand, we should balance the conflict between law and custom, give full play to the role of mediation and reconciliation, issue relevant guidance, and regulate the discretion of judges.