On Judge's Leading Thinking In Difficult Cases

In the face of difficult cases,the judge is the final referee,and its final decision on the judgment affects the impartiality of the case.How to ensure that judges can make correct decisions,we must first have a unified understanding of thinking.There are two kinds of mainstream judges in the current thinking.One is the legal teaching thought thought influenced by the methodological teaching thought of law teaching,and the other is the social science legal thinking led by the methodology thought of social science jurisprudence.There are gaps in how the two mainstream judges think about the handling of difficult cases,and it is worth thinking about the differences in the construction of social law.This article discusses the question of the judge's thinking when dealing with difficult cases from the perspective of justice.First of all,it identifies the difficult and controversial concepts of difficult cases,and takes “difficult cases” as the background and premise of the dissertation.In the case of ordinary cases or “simple cases”,the handling of cases is not too controversial.Acceptable conclusions can be drawn according to the provisions of the plaintext,but the handling of difficult cases leads to the handling of the results due to their own indeterminacy.Unpredictability,but also to make a fair conclusion,the judge needs to have the correct way of thinking.What kind of effect the two mainstream influences,ie,legal teaching thinking andsocial science jurisprudence thinking,respectively,have on the society will be worthy of comparison and comparison,and will be selected in accordance with the actual situation in China.Legal thinking is the dominant thinking of judges.From the viewpoint of this article,the dominant thinking of judges should be the teaching of legal philosophy.The article mainly discusses from four parts: The first part mainly discusses the difficult cases and analyzes the relevant contents of the difficult cases.In this context,the two mainstream judges are quoted and discussed in detail;the second part is taking the social science law thinking as the leading thinking,we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the judgments that are influenced by this thinking.In the third part,we will use legal dogmatic thinking as the dominant thinking to explore the necessity and feasibility of the dominant thinking,and as the dominant The positive significance of thinking;the fourth part is based on the first three parts,and it is concluded that the dominant thinking of the judge should be the thought of legal teaching,and listed China's first frozen embryo inheritance case on how to ensure fair handling of hard cases.