On The Improvement Of The Quality Of The Contemporary Judicial Documents In China

As the final embodiment of the judicial process,the judgment documents record the litigation process and dispute results of both parties,which is the legal basis for highlighting their rights and obligations,and has the characteristics of objectivity and impartiality.The judgment documents highlight the fairness and justice of the trial activities,and are also an important way to embody the legal system,legal thought and legal culture of our country.With the accelerating process of the construction of a law-based country and the deepening of judicial reform,the quality of judgment documents,the final product of litigation activities,has become an important content affecting the evaluation of judicial reform.The achievements of the reform of Chinese judgment documents have been very obvious,but there are still many problems which seriously affect the development and improvement of Chinese judgment documents.Therefore,in order to improve the system of referee documents in China,it is necessary to analyze the deep-seated problems,set our eyes on a broader field of vision,and make the study of referee documents more meaningful.In this paper,by analyzing the basic overview of the written judgment,in the existing problems,analyze our country present stage is in a continuous focus on substantive justice to procedural justice transition trend of judicial humanism gradually will also be injected to the referee,actively responded to vigorously carry forward the justice in the judicial activities,friendly,mutual aid of socialist core values and ethical requirements.However,there are also some problems that need to be solved urgently in the development of referee documents:firstly,the fact determination part is ambiguous,fact determination is one of the bases for the referee to make,while most of the fact determination part in the referee is simply listing the names of the evidence,and the description of the evidence is too concise.Secondly,in the argumentation part,most judges adopt the formatted document format.In the comparison between the two parts of fact finding and argumentation,they obviously focus on fact finding and ignore argumentation.The results obtained are generally in line with the objective conclusion,but not persuasive enough.Finally,in terms of the legal citation of modernjudgment documents,the application of laws and regulations is inaccurate and not specific.In some cases,the application of laws and regulations is even wrong,and there is a lack of interpretation of the application of laws when making judgment documents.Thus,through the modern and ancient written judgment of the contrast can be found that the ancient powers language rhetoric aspects pay more attention to individual signatures,use a variety of rhetorical devices,advocated Confucian culture of moral enlightenment,will be in the process of fully integrated into the argument of the reason,it is modern and ancient written judgment of the distinct difference.The comparison with the American judicial judgment is also very obvious.The Chinese and American judicial documents are also different in language,with their own features in language,words and sentence patterns.In the part of argumentation,the American judgment reflects the strong novelty,and it is not limited to the traditional syllogism model,which is devoted to creating different argumentation formats.On the basis of fully analyzing the differences,this paper analyzes the references of Chinese modern judicial documents in ancient judgments and American judicial opinions,and draws from them the opinions and Suggestions of practical significance to Chinese judicial documents.In this regard,this paper puts forward some Suggestions,such as strictly standardizing the use of legal language,improving the accuracy of fact determination,enhancing the rationality of judgment documents,emphasizing the improvement of legal interpretation,and improving the quality of judgment documents by using the intelligent judgment system,so as to provide an alternative path for the development of judicial documents in China.