The Research On The Civil Behavior Of Significant Misconception

China’s significant misconception system is set up on the principle of autonomy and good faith of civil law and it plays a significant role in many aspects, such as balancing autonomy, protecting the interests of the trust and keeping transaction security. Parties to a contract often find their implementation of meaning differs from words and the numbers of applying for change or cancel the contract on the cause of significant misconception have been growing in recent years. The problems main exist in unclear definition, too simple of the constitutive requirements, confusingly similar legal system. All these contribute to the different judging standards and results. In addition, the academic circle of our country have different opinions on the determination, identify and relief of significant misconception system. Above all, to study significant misconception system in China has double meaning of theory and practice.This article mainly uses the case analysis, comparative research and interest measure method to discuss. Ultimately I want to try to discover the problem of significant misunderstanding system in practice and then the solution. In general, the problems mainly include the following aspects: 1. The concept of expression, and its connotation is not matched; 2. The types of significant misunderstanding are too general and unclear; 3. The standard of identifying is not clear and it is hard to consensus in practice; 4.The relief ways provided are too simple, and with some insufficient. The paper analyses and compares on the basis of these problems.I made a comprehensive analysis of the concept and types of the significant misunderstanding system combining some main points of view and present legislation in the first part. The second part is about definition of the significant misunderstanding system. The second part makes some analysis about the constitutive requirements of the civil behavior of significant misconception through legal interpretation. The third part is a comprehensive and in-depth analysis of the relief ways. This part mainly points out its advantages and disadvantages by combining with the judicial precedent. The fourth part carries on the study and research through the comparison with the Germany law. And then compare it with recent significant misunderstanding system. The laws of Germany are representatives of the world. The last part points out the deficiency of significant misunderstanding system itself and analysis how should the legislation respond to the real need of society, and finally give some advice.