Will the judgment be changed in the second instance, and will the judgment be changed in the second

What are the chances of a reversal of the judgment in the second instance of a civil lawsuit?

Litigation jurisdiction refers to the scope of authority and specific division of labor between courts at all levels and between courts at the same level in different regions to accept first-instance civil and commercial cases, intellectual property cases and other types of cases.

Jurisdiction can be classified in a variety of ways according to different criteria, the most important and commonly used of which are hierarchical jurisdiction and territorial jurisdiction. The litigation jurisdiction of a specific case cannot be judged solely on the basis of hierarchical jurisdiction or territorial jurisdiction, but should be judged comprehensively by combining relevant rules. Territorial jurisdiction, exclusive jurisdiction, and agreed jurisdiction shall not violate the provisions of hierarchical jurisdiction.

If the appellant has no new evidence, the chances of the judgment being changed are not very high, and the second-instance trial procedure is set up to ensure that the parties exercise their right to appeal in accordance with the law and that the people's court at the next higher level conducts the trial in accordance with the law.

All the provisions of the Civil Procedure Law on the second-instance trial procedure are provisions for the trial of appeal cases. Therefore, the second-instance trial procedure is the procedure for hearing appeal cases, also known as the appellate trial procedure.

Judgments or rulings made by people's courts after applying the second-instance trial procedures to hear an appellate case are final judgments or rulings, and the parties must not appeal.

Therefore, the second-instance procedure is also known as the final procedure.

The second-instance trial procedure is a litigation procedure in which the appellant requests the people's court at the next higher level to review whether the judgment of the first-instance trial court is correct and lawful, and to protect his legitimate rights and interests with the right of appeal; It is also a litigation procedure in which the people's court at the level above examines and supervises the relevant content of the judgment of the first-instance trial court on the basis of the parties' appeal requests, so that the erroneous judgment can be corrected before it takes legal effect.

This should be based on the specific circumstances, and in ordinary cases, the court of first instance has evidence in the trial, and the second-instance judgment should be upheld. Only when the evidence is insufficient, the application is erroneous in law, or the trial procedure is wrong, can the court of second instance change the judgment or remand for a new trial.

If evidence is found and the evidence is sufficient, the judgment can still be changed if it is submitted to the court for a second trial.

Article 189 of China's Criminal Procedure Law reads: "After trial, the second-instance people's court shall handle an appeal or prosecutorial counter-appeal case against a first-instance judgment in accordance with the following distinct circumstances: (1) Where the facts ascertained in the original judgment and the application of law are correct, and the sentence is appropriate, it shall rule to reject the appeal or prosecutorial counter-appeal and uphold the original judgment; (2) Where there is no error in the facts ascertained in the original judgment, but there is an error in the application of law, or the sentence is improper, the judgment shall be changed; (3) Where the facts of the original judgment are unclear or the evidence is insufficient, the judgment may be changed after the facts are clarified; A ruling may also be made to revoke the original judgment and remand to the original people's court for new trial. ”

In other words, there are two types of reversal of the sentence:

1. "Where there is an error in the application of law, or where the sentence is improper, the judgment shall be changed" means that where the wrongful conviction is made, the judgment shall be changed; Even if the conviction is accurate, the sentence shall be changed if the sentence is unusually light or heavy.

2. "Where the facts of the original judgment are unclear or the evidence is insufficient", the judgment may be changed after the facts are clarified. (It can also be remanded for reconsideration).

There is no doubt that in the current rule of law environment, it is indeed occasionally the case that interpersonal relationships influence the rule of law. However, based on the implementation of the responsibility system for wrongful convictions, the court of second instance will generally not change the judgment of the court of first instance, unless the judgment of the court of first instance is completely wrong. However, the possibility of the court of second instance ruling to remand for a new trial cannot be ruled out.

The probability of a change of judgment in the second instance is not fixed, if you have sufficient evidence in your hand and the lawyer is relatively strong, the probability of changing the judgment is still very high, and if the evidence is insufficient or invalid, the judgment will generally not be changed.

20% hope. Generally, first-instance judgments are decided only after the evidence is sufficient, and most second-instance judgments will uphold the first-instance judgment, unless one party finds stronger evidence than before.

If the appellant has no new evidence, the probability of changing the judgment is not very high, and if the court of second instance finds that the trial is indeed improper, it is very likely to remand for a new trial, because once the judgment is changed, it means that the court of first instance has made a wrong judgment, and the wrong judgment will have a bad impact on the court of first instance!

I am a lawyer, and as far as you said, the verdict will not be changed in the second instance.

Anything is possible, you're not a child, are you?

In accordance with the provisions of Article 172 of the Civil Procedure Law, the court of second instance will form a collegial panel in accordance with the law to comprehensively review the facts, evidence, and procedures of the case, and to respond objectively to the appellant's request and the appellee's defense, and to hear the case fairly and in accordance with law; (1) Where the facts ascertained in the original judgment or ruling are clear and the law is correctly applied, the appeal is rejected by way of judgment or ruling, and the original judgment or ruling is upheld;

2) Where the original judgment or ruling was erroneously ascertained in fact or the law was applied incorrectly, the judgment or ruling is to be changed, revoked, or modified in accordance with law;

3) Where the basic facts found in the original judgment are unclear, rule to revoke the original judgment and remand to the original people's court for new trial, or change the judgment after clarifying the facts;

4) Where the original judgment omits parties or makes an unlawful default judgment or seriously violates legally-prescribed procedures, a ruling is made to revoke the original judgment and remand to the original people's court for new trial.

Legal analysis: The judgment may be changed after the second instance, but it needs to be satisfied that the facts and facts determined in the original judgment are unclear or the evidence is insufficient, the application of law is wrong, or the sentencing is improper, and the people's court will generally not change the judgment in other cases. Where the facts in the original judgment are unclear or the evidence is insufficient, the judgment may be changed to an erection after the facts are clarified; A ruling may also be made to revoke the original judgment and remand to the original people's court for new trial.

Legal basis: Article 236 of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China: After trial, the second-instance people's court shall handle appeals or prosecutorial counter-appeals against the first-instance judgment in accordance with the following distinct circumstances: (1) Where the facts ascertained in the original judgment and the application of law are correct, and the sentencing is appropriate, a ruling shall be made to reject the appeal or prosecutorial counter-appeal and uphold the original judgment; (2) Where there is no error in the facts ascertained in the original judgment, but there is an error in the application of law, or the sentencing is improper, the judgment shall be changed; (3) Where the facts of the original judgment are unclear or the evidence is insufficient, the judgment may be changed after the facts are clarified; A ruling may also be made to revoke the original judgment and remand to the original people's court for new trial.

Legal analysis: The judgment may be changed after the second-instance trial is opened, but it needs to be satisfied that the facts and facts determined in the original judgment are unclear or the evidence is insufficient, the application of law is wrong, or the sentencing is improper, and the people's court will generally not change the judgment in other circumstances. Where the facts in the original judgment are unclear or the evidence is insufficient, the judgment may be changed after the facts are clarified; A ruling may also be made to revoke the original judgment and remand to the original people's court for new trial.

Legal basis: "Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China" Article 236: After trial, the second-instance people's court shall handle appeals or prosecutorial counter-appeals against the first-instance judgment in accordance with the following distinct circumstances: (1) Where the facts ascertained in the original judgment and the application of law are correct, and the sentence is appropriate, it shall rule to reject the appeal or prosecutorial counter-appeal and uphold the original judgment; (2) Where there is no error in the facts ascertained in the original judgment, but there is an error in the application of law, or the sentence is improper, the judgment shall be changed; (3) Where the facts of the original judgment are unclear or the evidence is insufficient, the judgment may be changed after the facts are clarified; A ruling may also be made to revoke the original judgment and remand to the original people's court for new trial.

Whether the judgment will be changed after the second instance needs to be determined based on specific evidence, as follows:

1. If the parties have new evidence to prove that the original trial was wrong, or that the procedures were violated or the law was wrongly applied, they may remand for a new trial and the judgment can be reversed;

2. If there is no new evidence to prove it, the judgment cannot be reversed.

Determination of the scope of the second instance of civil trial:

1. We should interpret the appeal request in a broad sense, that is, in addition to the request made by the appellant, it also includes the request made by the appellee and the third party of the original trial in the defense;

2. The appellant's appeal request shall generally not exceed the scope of the first-instance litigation claim. That is, no new litigation claims may be filed in the second instance. The so-called filing of new litigation claims is mainly manifested in situations where the plaintiff in the original trial adds litigation claims, the defendant submits a counterclaim, and a third party files a lawsuit requesting Shen Xiangsu.

This is a requirement of the two-instance final adjudication system. Otherwise, you will be in a dilemma. Because the new claim is final in the second instance, the parties will lose the right to appeal;

3. The parties' appeal requests may exceed the scope of the first-instance judgment. The litigation claims raised by the parties in the first-instance trial procedure shall be the basis for the people's court to make a judgment, that is, the court of first instance shall make a clear and specific judgment on the claims of the parties. However, in trial practice, the court of first instance did not give a judgment on all the claims, leaving the parties' claims in a state of non-preference.

Legal basisArticle 225 of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China.

After trial, the second-instance trial court shall handle appeals or prosecutorial counter-appeals against the first-instance judgment in accordance with the following distinct circumstances:

1) Where the facts ascertained in the original judgment and the application of law are correct, and the sentencing is appropriate, a ruling shall be made to reject the appeal or prosecutorial counter-appeal and uphold the original judgment;

(2) Where there is no error in the facts ascertained in the original judgment, but there is an error in the application of law, or the sentence is improper, the judgment shall be changed;

(3) Where the facts of the original judgment are unclear or the evidence is insufficient, the judgment may be changed after the facts are clarified; It may also be ruled to revoke the original judgment and remand to the original adjudicator, the Tongluo Civil Court, for a new trial.

After the original people's court makes a judgment in a case remanded for new trial in accordance with item (3) of the preceding paragraph, and the defendant submits an appeal or the people's procuratorate raises a prosecutorial counter-appeal, the second-instance trial court shall make a judgment or ruling in accordance with law, and must not remand to the original people's court for new trial.

1. It is unlikely that the judgment will be reversed.

2. After the judgment of the first-instance civil case is pronounced and the judgment is served, as long as one of the original defendants appeals, the second-instance trial procedure will be triggered. If the people's court of second instance finds that the application of law and the ascertained facts are correct, it will reject the appeal and uphold the original judgment, which is the result in most cases.

3. Because the court of first instance cannot guarantee the correctness of the vast majority of cases, it is necessary to hold the rest accountable.

4. If the Second People's Court finds that there is an error in the trial procedure of Minju, or that the facts and application of law are wrong, it will revoke the original judgment and remand for a new trial, and of course it can directly change the judgment after ascertaining the facts, but it is very rare in judicial practice, because this is not conducive to the lower court correcting the error and improving the level of case handling.