Abstract: With respect to the deficiencies in China’s legal provisions on the revocation of guardianship qualifications and the related issues in judicial practice, the grounds for revocation can be categorized and systematically explained based on the binary logic of “acts and states” that trigger changes in guardianship relations. In typological construction, conduct-based grounds for revocation can be divided into active and passive forms, and further into specific categories according to whether property rights or personal rights are infringed; state-based grounds for revocation can be classified into four types—serious illness, financial condition, restriction of freedom, and social morality—each corresponding to certain case types. In systematic interpretation, the specific content and applicable relations of the basic norms should be followed to accurately match the typologized grounds for revocation, while the standards for determination should be properly established by reference to both normative purposes and practical circumstances. The typological construction of revocation grounds and the systematic interpretation of norms must be coordinated throughout the entire process, so as to construct a system for judging grounds for revocation of guardianship qualifications suitable for China’s civil law.