论文部分内容阅读
中国于2012年对民事诉讼法进行了大幅修改,其中增设了第162条小额诉讼的规定。但新《民事诉讼法》的小额诉讼规定只有一个条款,并没有具体的操作规定。可以说除了诉讼标的额限制和一审终审的特别规定外,与一般简易程序没有任何差异。反观与中国同属大陆法系的韩国,韩国于1973年制定了《小额案件审判法》专门规定了小额诉讼程序,已施行40多年。大部分一审民事案件通过小额诉讼程序解决,可以说在小额诉讼领域,韩国的法制建设和司法实践经验远远要比中国丰富。韩国小额诉讼制度的最大的特点是为追求民事纠纷的迅速解决,以单行法的形式规定了专门适用于小额案件的一般民事诉讼制度的特例。这些特例涵盖了从起诉阶段到审理阶段,再到判决阶段等整个民事诉讼过程。对尚处于起步阶段的中国来说,韩国的小额诉讼法制可以起到一定的借鉴作用。
In 2012, China amended the Civil Procedure Law drastically, adding the provision of Article 162 of the Small Claims Law. However, the new “Code of Civil Procedure Law” has only one clause in the law of small claims, and there are no specific operational rules. It can be said that there are no differences from the general summary procedure except for the limitation of the subject matter of litigation and the special provisions of the first instance for final examination. On the contrary, both South Korea and South Korea, both of which are civil law countries in China, formulated the Small Judgment Act of 1973 specifically for small-sum proceedings and have been in operation for more than 40 years. Most of the first instance civil cases are solved through small claims procedures. It can be said that in the field of small amount litigation, South Korea’s legal construction and experience in judicial practice are far more abundant than in China. The most prominent feature of South Korean microfinance system is the special case of the general civil procedure system which is specially applied to small-sum cases in the form of a single-line method in order to pursue the prompt settlement of civil disputes. These exceptions cover the entire process of civil litigation, from the prosecution stage to the trial stage to the judgment stage. For China, which is still in its infancy, South Korea’s law of petty lawsuit can play a certain reference role.