Earticle

Procedure for trial supervision is the procedure of retrial of the cases that has been judged, ruled or mediated and put on trail by the People's Court. It is a special trial supervision procedure. In addition to a small number of retrials proposed by procuratorial organs and superior courts or this court, most cases of trial supervision are for the retrials applied by the parties, therefore, it includes two procedures : rechecking procedure of application for civil retial and trial procedure. In judicial practice, the simplicity and imperfection of the procedural law in China resulted in the vacuum of legislative for retrial procedure, which leads the blind spots in the review procedure. The problems on the proceeding and operation of retrial, also lead to the difficulty of application for retrial and low efficiency for review on one hand, and embarrassing situation of unlimited retrial on the other hand. As a result, the authority of the courts' judgments, the solemnity of the law are weakened.The procedure for trial supervision in new Civil Procedure Law was revised mainly in four aspects: clarify the application for retrial to the superior courts; further make concrete analysis on retrial causes; explicitly stipulate the review procedure and time limit of retrial; and prolong the time limit of special retrial cases for applications. This amendment is an appropriate way to solve the problem on the difficulty of application, and laid the foundation for solving the problems on the difficulties for appeals.

审判监督程序就是指对判决、裁定或调解协议已经发生效力的案件提起再行审理以及人民法院依法对这些案件进行再行审理的程序。它是一种特别的审判程序。除少数由检察机关、上级法院或本院依职权提起再审外，审判监督案件多数是由当事人申请再审引起的，因此在事实上包含着两个程序：再审申请复查程序和再审程序。在司法实践中，由于我国诉讼法上的粗放和简约，造成再审程序立法的真空，导致复查程序存在法律盲区，加上再审程序启动和运作上的问题，造成一方面申请再审难，审查工作效率低下；另一方面，又“终而不终”，无限再审的尴尬局面，以致法院裁判的权威性、法律的严肃性严重受损。新≪民事诉讼法≫主要从四方面对审判监督程序进行修改： 一、明确向上一级人民法院申请再审；二、进一步将再审事由明晰化、具体化；三、明确了再审事由的审查程序和审查期限；四、延长了特殊再审事由的申请再审期间。这次修正是针对“申诉难”问题有的放矢、对症下药，为审判事件中解决“申诉难”难问题奠定了基础。

A shareholders’ derivative suit system is not only the measure of controlling company’s director, or board of director’s abuse of rights control device but also has a risk of strike suit under the circumstance of shareholders who are eligible for plaintiff, overuse a shareholders’ derivative suit institution for the purpose of their benefit.Accordingly, a shareholders’ derivative suit has both usefulness and the possibility of overuse. Thus, there should be a suitable balance and agreement between the rights of supervision on the company’s director, or board of director for the minority of shareholders who are eligible for plaintiff and healthy and clear rights of the execution of one’s duty for the company’s director, or board of director.China introduced a shareholders’ derivative suit as new provisions in Chinese new company law reformation in 2005. (§150~§153) The main purpose of this introduction is to regulate by the law, by means of, to correspond to globalized economy system, to improve corporative governance and to protect minority of shareholders from interest plan. However, there are small numbers of case using shareholders’ derivative suit up to now. Consequently, it is examined from various points to revitalize the shareholders’ derivative suit. Firstly, in the case of a stock company that is under the regulation of Chinese new company law, it is necessary to improve widely the rights of litigating shareholders’ derivative suit for shareholders who continuously owns a stock for more than 180 days individually or in total of more than 1%. Or, it can be improved as individual shareholder’s right like in America and Japan.Moreover, it is necessary to improve the condition of demanding account book and documents as it is difficult to collect information for the minority of shareholders who can institute shareholders’ derivative suit and they have to charge proof responsibility on the process of litigation.At present, overuse of shareholders’ derivative suit’s institution is not a serious problem to concern in China. However, if shareholders’ derivative suit system revitalizes, there will be a frequent institution on inappropriate litigation from shareholders for the purpose of their benefit and strike suit. To solve this problem, it is explained in detail above. In addition, to cultivate excellent talents for the company with the solution of preventing economic crisis should be studied.

As the Chinese economy is open, more and more investors are focusing their eyes on the china market, even when there are short-term economic fluctuations. This paper begins with the current situation of the foreign invested companys in china. It analyzes the characters of different kinds of the foreign invested companies and the problems on current systems, by introducing, contrasting and evaluating them.At first, according to the cooperating form with Chinese companies, foreign invested companies include the joint ventures, cooperative enterprises and wholly foreign-owned enterprises. Also they can be divided into limited liability companies and joint-stock limited companies according to the fund-raising method. And It contrasts and analyzes the companies at the forms of organizations, internal structure, shortcomings and advantages.Secondly, it describes the foreign‐invested joint-stock limited companies and the procedure to set up them especially on the procedure of changing the foreign-invested limited liability companies to foreign-invested joint-stock limited companies.Thirdly, this paper analyzes the advantages and shortcomings of the foreign-invested limited liability companies and the foreign-invested joint-stock limited companies by contrasting the fund-raising method, relationship between the shareholders, investing forms and stock equity transferring of them.At last, on the base of introducing the related laws and regulations, this paper analyzes the defects of the current regulations on the foreign-invested joint-stock limited companies in china.

This paper, citing environmental pollution as an example, discusses whether the problem of discriminatory treatment of disadvantaged groups, under the current system, can be solved. This paper concludes that, as long as the people have no voice in the decision-making of public goods system, discriminatory treatment of disadvantaged groups will continue as before. At the same time, the same treatment required by rule of law is impossible to achieve at all. We can also conclude that the required purpose in environmental pollution by state council, that is, to decrease 20 per cent in energy consumption in 5 years, can only be achieved in the price of low growth in economic development.

File exclusive principle means that the administrative subject, when making administrative behavior, should rely on the file only, rather than on the unknown or unproved facts of the party beyond the file. And the file exclusive principle can not be equal to hearing & notes exclusive principle. In addition, file exclusive develops from the original unilateral proof plus prejudice into the unilateral proof exclusion, from the formal procedure ruling into the informal procedure ruling, from the British & American legal system into the continental legal system. The universal applicability of file exclusive principle lies in its profoundness, i.e. it enables the role of procedure visible, and in turn, ensures the fact elements and legal elements evidenced in the procedure are the sole foundation for making administrative behavior, which then realizes the function and value of the procedure.

The legislature shall avoid the thought of abroad criminalization, and ‘regardless of the quantity involved, shall be investigated for criminal responsibility’ shall be deleted; Because of the speciality of drugs crime, we shall overcome rigorous notion, death penalty concerning drugs crime shall be cancelled in the future.

The theory about the standard of medical action become popular, however, the background and the applicability about this theory still lacks enough analysis. Based on the interaction between precedent and doctrine, this theory in Japan has experienced a process from the standard in medicine and the absolute standard to the relative standard of medical action. If the judgment of medical action is based on the standard of medical action, it will not only provide the prescriptive judgment standard, but also provide the guide to action for medical. Under the background of China, this theory should be applicable too. When we apply this theory, we shouldn’t embrace the standard in medicine, but the relative standard of medical action. Specifically, the particularity of hospital, the difference of area, the difference of doctor’s field，the currency of medical knowledge and the urgency of medical action should be taken into consideration, and so on. The order of priority of medical customs should be dismissed from the standard of medical action. The standard of medical action should be a prescriptive standard, and the difference between the standard of medical action and the medical consultation from processional. And we should also pay enough attention to the limit of this theory.

Two major Acts on the substance and procedure of juvenile delinquent was passed during the plenary session of Korean National Assembly in November and promulgated in December 2007, and entered into force in June 2008. This paper introduces the two acts, i.e., “Juvenile Act” to deal with the type and dispositions of juvenile delinquent and “Act on Dispositions of Protected Juvenile, etc.” to regulate juvenile reformatory and Juvenile Classification Review Board, and makes some comments as well. The main outline of this paper is as follows:Chapter 1. IntroductionChapter 2. History of Korean Juvenile ActChapter 3. Main Issues of Revised Acts on Juvenile ProtectionChapter 4. ConclusionAppendix 1. Chinese Translation Table of Korean “Juvenile Act” 2. Chinese Translation Table of Korean “Act on Dispositions of Protected Juvenile, etc.”My evaluation on the recently revised Korean Juvenile Act can be summarized as follows: First, it is desirable to change difficult legal term into easy Korean one. Second, the range of age in juvenile protection cases was appropriately rearranged. The term “juveniles” was reduced to the person under the age of less than 19. It was extended to the juveniles who are 10 years of age or more but less than 14 years old who have committed acts in violation of Acts and subordinate statutes relating to criminal punishment. It was also expanded to the juveniles who are 10 years of age or more, fall under one of the following categories and in view of their character or environment, may be prone to commit acts in violation of Acts and subordinate statutes: (a) Juveniles who habitually move around in crowds and cause other persons a feeling of unrest; (b) Juveniles who run away from home without a justifiable reason; and (c) Juveniles who habitually make commotion under alcoholic influence or who habitually are in contact with harmful environment. Third, the introduction of public assistant system seems to be a good step for the real protection of due process and human rights of juveniles. Fourth, I think it makes institutional devices to find proper disposition for juvenile delinquent that a public prosecutor should review the pre-sentence report prepared by a classification review officer or a probation officer before making a final decision and that conditional suspension of indictment was codified. Fifth, it is prospective that the type of protective disposition is diversified and that the period of a certain disposition is somewhat adjusted. However, it is remaining task that the specific programs to realize restorative justice and other various rehabilitation programs for juvenile delinquent should be developed and specialized. Sixth, a more effective and systematic master plan needs to be prepared through the network of media, citizen, public service, industry, school and research institute, etc. based on the basic regulations for the prevention of juvenile delinquency.