In Chinese current judicial practice, the general reason or common sense of“who claims, who proves the evidence”is still followed to distribute the“burden of proof”of the facts to be proved. It is especially popular to change the burden of proof when the lack of evidence leads to difficult judgment of facts. The consequence of this burden of proof is that the facts of the case are unfavorable to the party concerned. In the context of our country, the name of“non liquet”and its judgment method are different from the modern theory of burden of proof in continental law system. This Chinese-style burden of proof conflicts with the classical theory of burden of proof and the current legal norms of our country, but it is highly consistent with the foundation of Chinese cultural concept and has its own internal logic and practical rationality. In order to solve the contradiction between theory and practice, on the one hand, it is advisable to recognize and try to construct this kind of Chinese-style burden of proof in the field of fact recognition, on the other hand. The emphasis of the modern system of burden of proof should be put on the function of justifying the result of“burden of proof”as the burden of failure when the truth is not known in the past. The Shift to“burden of proof distribution”should be the adjustment of the civil trial process of the adjudication methodology function.