What is the connection and difference between the second instance procedure and the first instance p

1 The procedure takes place according to the differences.

The first-instance trial procedure is based on the parties' right to sue and the jurisdiction of the people's court of first instance; The second-instance proceedings are based on the parties' right to appeal.

2 The level of trial is different.

In accordance with the provisions of the Organic Law of the People's Courts and the Civil Procedure Law, the first-instance trial procedure is the procedure for the trial of a case in the people's court of first instance, and is the first instance; The second-instance trial procedure is the procedure for the case to be heard in the second-instance people's court, and it is a continuation of the trial. They are the trial procedures applied by the people's courts at the two trial levels.

3 The organization of the trial is different.

The first-instance trial procedures include ordinary procedures and summary procedures, and the trial organization forms of collegial and single-judge systems are implemented respectively. When the collegial system is applied, the collegial panel may be composed of adjudicators, or may be composed of adjudicators and jurors; The trial organization of the second-instance trial procedure is only a collegial system, and the collegial panel can only be composed of adjudicators, and jurors are not admitted.

4 The object of the trial is different.

The first instance is caused by a dispute over the rights and obligations between the parties, and the object of the trial is the facts and rights and obligations of the two parties. The second-instance trial is caused by the parties' dissatisfaction with the first-instance judgment, and the object of the trial is the facts determined by the court of first instance and the applicable law involved in the parties' appeal requests.

5 The deadline for the conclusion of the trial is different.

The time limit for the conclusion of the ordinary procedures of the first instance is generally 6 months, and the time limit for the summary procedures is 3 months; Where the second-instance trial procedures are applied to try a case, and the judgment is not satisfied, the time limit for conclusion of trial is 3 months; If they are not satisfied with the ruling, the time limit for the conclusion of trial is 30 days.

6 The effect of the referee is different.

First-instance judgments and rulings granting appeals made by local people's courts at all levels do not take legal effect within the statutory appeal period; However, a judgment or ruling made by a people's court of second instance takes legal effect once the judgment is pronounced and served, and is the final judgment or ruling.

Although the second-instance trial procedure is based on the exercise of the right of action by the parties as the first-instance trial procedure, there are the following differences between the two:

First, the level of trial is different. The first-instance procedure is the procedure applied by the court of first instance of the case, while the second-instance procedure is the first.

The procedures to be applied by the people's court at the level above the first-instance court hearing second-instance cases.

Secondly, the reasons for which the trial proceedings took place were not identical. The first-instance proceedings occurred because the parties exercised their right to sue, and the second-instance proceedings were caused by the parties' exercise of the right to appeal. Although the right to sue and the right to appeal are both rights of action, their direct purpose is different.

The exercise of the right to sue requires the people's court to ascertain the facts of the case and correctly apply the law to protect its own legitimate rights and interests; The direct purpose of exercising the right of appeal is to request the higher people's court to review the facts determined by the court of first instance and the applicable law, so as to change the judgment of the first instance, so as to achieve the ultimate goal of safeguarding one's own legitimate rights and interests.

Thirdly, the tasks are different. In addition to fulfilling the same task of the same first-instance trial procedure and resolving disputes between the parties, the second-instance trial procedure also undertakes the task of inspecting and supervising the adjudication work of the court at the next higher level.

Fourth, the procedures applied are different. People's courts hearing first-instance civil cases may apply both ordinary and summary procedures; However, in the trial of appeal cases, only the second-instance trial procedures can be applied, and where there are no provisions in the second-instance trial procedures, the relevant provisions of the ordinary procedures shall apply.

Fifth, the effectiveness of referees is different. The judgment made by the court of second instance in the second-instance case takes effect immediately after it is announced, and is the final judgment; However, the judgment of the first-instance case is effective or ineffective, and the parties are allowed to exercise the right of appeal within the statutory time limit.

Legal Analysis:1The reasons for the trial proceedings were different. The occurrence of first-instance litigation proceedings is based on the right of the parties to sue and the jurisdiction of the court; The second-instance procedure is based on the parties' right to appeal and the second-instance court's right to supervise the trial.

2.The level of review is different. The first-instance litigation procedures are the procedures applied to the trial of the case in the people's court of first instance; The second-instance procedure is the procedure for the case to be heard in the court of second instance, and it is the procedure applied by the court at the next higher level of the court to which the case is filed in the first instance when hearing the appeal case.

3.The organization of the trial is different. There are two organizational forms for the court of first instance to apply the first-instance litigation procedures to hear civil cases, namely, the collegial system and the single-judge system.

Where a collegial system is implemented, the collegial panel may be composed of adjudicators, or may be composed of adjudicators and jurors; However, the second-instance court can only adopt a collegial system when applying the second-instance trial procedures to hear an appeal case, and the collegial panel must be composed of adjudicators, and cannot have jurors participate.

4.The object of the trial is different. The first-instance litigation procedure is based on the plaintiff's complaint and the defendant's reply, and the object of the trial is the civil rights and interests dispute between the two parties, while the second-instance trial procedure is based on the first-instance judgment to review the relevant facts and applicable law of the parties' appeal request, and the object of the trial is the judgment of the court of first instance.

5.The manner in which the proceedings are conducted is different. When applying the first-instance trial procedures to hear civil litigation cases, the court can only adopt the method of trial first-class; However, when applying the second-instance trial procedures to hear civil appeal cases, the court may choose to adopt the method of trial or direct judgment based on the actual circumstances such as whether the facts of the case are clear.

6.The effect of the referee is different. The judgment after the conclusion of the first-instance trial procedure is applied, and during the appeal period, it is a judgment that has not taken legal effect; A judgment after the conclusion of the second-instance trial procedures is a legally effective judgment, and the parties must not raise an appeal.

Legal basis: Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China

Article 149:People's courts applying the ordinary procedures shall conclude trial within 6 months of filing the case. If there are special circumstances that require an extension, it may be extended for six months with the approval of the president of the court; and where an extension is still necessary, it is to be reported to the people's court at the level above for approval.

Article 164:Where parties are dissatisfied with the first-instance judgment of a local people's court, they have the right to appeal to the people's court at the level above within 15 days of the judgment being served.

Where a party is dissatisfied with a local people's court's first-instance ruling, it has the right to appeal to the people's court at the level above within 10 days of the date on which the ruling is served.

The first-instance trial procedure is the premise and basis of the second-instance trial procedure. The application of the second-instance trial procedure and the application of the first-instance trial procedure are the same administrative case.

The first-instance procedure is different from the second-instance procedure as follows:

1. The reasons for the occurrence are different. The first-instance trial procedure is based on a lawful lawsuit filed by a citizen, legal person or other organization. The second-instance proceedings are based on the appeal of the parties in the first-instance proceedings.

2. The applicable adjudication organs are different. The adjudication organ applying the second-instance trial procedures is the people's court at the level above the people's court applying the first-instance trial procedures.

3. The trial object is different. The object of the trial of the first-instance trial procedure is the specific administrative act being sued, and the issue to be resolved is whether the specific administrative act being sued is legal; The subject matter of the second-instance trial procedure is the judgment or ruling of the first-instance people's court, and the issue to be resolved is whether the judgment or ruling of the first-instance trial court is lawful.

4. The legal consequences are different. Judgments or rulings made by the first-instance trial court applying the first-instance trial procedures do not have enforceable force during the legally-prescribed period. The judgment or ruling made by the people's court of second instance applying the first-instance trial procedures is a final judgment or ruling, and once it is made, it will take legal effect and the parties shall enforce it; Failure to do so may result in enforcement by the people's courts.

Relevant knowledge. I. The process of first-instance administrative litigation cases.

After the people's court has accepted the lawsuit filed by the parties, it is time to begin the trial of the administrative case that gave rise to the dispute. The first thing that took place was the first instance of the case. The first-instance trial procedures for administrative cases refer to the procedures that should be applied by the court of first instance in the trial of administrative cases, including pre-trial preparation, ** trial, collegial panel deliberation and judgment.

1. The people's court shall send a copy of the complaint to the defendant within five days from the date on which the case is filed. The defendant shall, within 10 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the complaint, submit to the people's court the relevant materials for taking the specific administrative act and submit a reply, and the people's court shall send a copy of the reply to the plaintiff within 5 days of receiving the reply;

2. Notify the parties and other litigation participants of the time and place of **.

II. Procedures for the second instance of administrative litigation.

The second-instance trial procedure for administrative litigation, also known as the appellate trial procedure, refers to the procedure whereby the people's court at the next higher level makes a judgment or ruling that has not yet taken effect and makes a judgment and make a judgment in accordance with the provisions of the law and on the basis of an appeal filed by the party to the people's court at the level above the court of first instance within the statutory time limit on the basis of the parties' dissatisfaction with the judgment or judgment made by the people's court of first instance.

Article 169 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China.

The second-instance people's court shall form a collegial panel for trial of appeal cases. After reading the case file, investigating and questioning the parties, if no new facts, evidence, or reasons are presented, and the collegial panel finds that it is not necessary to conduct a trial, it may not conduct a trial.

Second-instance people's courts hearing appeals may do so in that court, or may do so at the location of the original people's court where the case occurred.

In the first instance, the people's procuratorate at the same level as the court of first instance initiates a public prosecution or the private prosecutor initiates a private prosecution. The second-instance trial refers to the appeal of the parties to the first-instance case or the people's procuratorate at the same level as the first-instance court.

In the first instance, the people's procuratorate at the same level as the court of first instance initiates a public prosecution or the private prosecutor initiates a private prosecution. The second-instance trial refers to the appeal of the parties to the first-instance case or the people's procuratorate at the same level as the first-instance court.

2) The object of the trial is different.

The first instance trial is conducted on whether the facts of the crime alleged in the indictment and private prosecution exist. The second-instance trial is conducted to determine whether the judgment and ruling of the first-instance trial that has not yet taken effect are correct.

3) The courts that have the power to conduct the trial are different.

The court of first instance is governed by the provisions of hierarchical jurisdiction, and any court at any level can hear a case of first instance. The court of second instance must be the court at the next higher level than the court of first instance.

4) The trial procedure is different.

The first instance trial must be tried first, and the summary procedures may be applied if the conditions are met. The second-instance trial may be conducted in the form of ** or investigative interrogation, and the summary procedures cannot be applied.

5) The organization of the trial is different.

First-instance trials may be in the form of a collegial panel or a single-judge panel, and when a collegial panel is employed, people's assessors may also participate in the trial. Second-instance trials may only be in the form of a collegial panel, and people's assessors must not participate in the trial.

6) The results of the treatment are different and their effects are different.

A verdict of guilt or acquittal was rendered in the first instance. The judgment of the first instance does not necessarily have legal effect. The second-instance trial makes a ruling upholding the original judgment, a ruling to remand for new trial, or a direct revision of the judgment. Except for remanding for a new trial, and commuting or upholding the death sentence, the second-instance judgment will take effect immediately.

7) The first instance is a mandatory procedure for every criminal case, and the second instance is not.

Civil aspects: 1) The applicable trial level is different. The second-instance procedure is the procedure for hearing a case appealed against the first-instance trial by the court at the next higher level than the court of first instance. The court of second instance and the court of first instance of the same case are subordinate to each other, and the third point is the same as that of criminal law.

2) The reason why the program is launched is not the same. The initiation of the first instance is due to the litigation rights enjoyed by the parties and the court's right to adjudicate the disputed case, and the initiation of the second-instance trial procedure is the exercise of the right of appeal by the parties and the exercise of the court's right to supervise the summer court by the superior who is instructed by the law.

3) The purpose of the program is different. The purpose of the first instance is to resolve the dispute and protect the legitimate civil rights and interests of the parties. In addition to the purpose of the first instance, the second instance also includes the purpose of achieving the supervision of the higher court over the lower court.