Psychological tactics are widely used in civil trial practice, but they have not been paid enough attention to in judicial theory and practice. This paper deeply analyzes the reasons why psychological tactics are widely used in civil trials. According to the different objects, the application of psychological tactics can be divided into the application form of the parties and the application form of the litigation agent. Starting with case analysis, this paper describes two application forms of psychological tactics, and puts forward some suggestions on standardizing psychological tactics in civil trials.

The following text:

Psychological tactics [1] are widely used in civil trial practice, but due to the lack of system norms, the use of this tactic leads to the unreasonable expansion of judges' rights in reality, and the litigation rights of the parties cannot be guaranteed. Of course, the extensive use of psychological tactics has contributed to the settlement of disputes to a great extent, fundamentally solved contradictions and greatly promoted the construction of a harmonious society at present. In order to give full play to psychological and tactical advantages, minimize its negative effects and ensure the fair, clean and efficient exercise of judicial power, we must put forward corresponding countermeasures and suggestions on the basis of full research.

First, the reasons why psychological warfare is widely used in civil trials

At present, the judicial guiding ideology of our country's court system has changed from "adjusting when it can, and judging when it is judged" to "focusing on mediation and combining adjustment with judgment". One of the important indicators to measure the judge's handling level is the mediation rate. Mediation rate is directly linked to the promotion of judges' ranks and bonuses, which leads judges to be more inclined to mediation in trial practice.

The unreasonable petition system in China is also an important reason why judges choose mediation to close the case. Due to the independence of the judiciary, individual leaders of party committees, people's congresses, governments and other state institutions put pressure on the courts and judges handling cases in various ways, which affected the judgment of cases. The injustice of the verdict leads to the public's distrust of the judge, which requires the state to further strengthen the supervision of the court and the judge, and this so-called supervision gives some leaders of other state institutions the power to further interfere with the independent trial of the court. Among them, the most common way to interfere with the trial is letters and visits. The parties who are dissatisfied with the court's decision do not appeal and appeal through normal judicial channels, but choose to report the situation to the Party Committee and the People's Congress through letters and visits, and these institutions that accept letters and visits will feed back to the court through letters and other means. Once the parties petition, some superior leaders generally do not consider whether the trial itself is correct, and many leaders are not from the legal profession. Just seeing the emotional petition of the parties, they directly think that there is something wrong with the court trial, and the contradiction has not been finally resolved, which has added chaos to the party Committee and government. Although the court leaders know that there are no mistakes in the trial of cases in most cases, they have to punish the case-handling judge under the pressure of their superiors. Mediation will eliminate the possibility of the parties petitioning.

In order to improve the success rate of mediation, judges guide and even exert pressure on both sides through various psychological tactics in the process of mediation. Although the mediation process is not recorded to some extent, the way judges use psychological tactics is generally obscure, which will not be reflected in the technical mediation transcript. Because the case was finally solved, the parties themselves did not suffer too much, and finally obeyed mediation. Even after the judge used various psychological warfare, the parties did not accept mediation, and both sides were more inclined to obey the judgment.

Second, the form of using psychological tactics in civil trial

(A) psychological and tactical forms for both sides to use

1. Put forward mediation opinions directly. In the process of presiding over the mediation between the two parties, the judge strongly put forward his own understanding of the causes of the dispute and the division of responsibilities between the two parties, and hinted that if one party does not accept the mediation opinion, it will bear greater responsibility [2]. For example, Wang Moumou v. Li Moumou and his son's personal injury compensation dispute case.

Wang Moumou and Li Moumou are villagers in the same village. In the process of helping the villagers to repair their houses, there was a quarrel. Wang Moumou excitedly rushed forward and slapped Li Moumou. Li Moumou was unwilling to be humiliated and began to fight back. The son of Li Moumou who just passed by saw his father being beaten by Wang Moumou. He picked up a brick and rushed forward to pat Wang on the head. Wang moumou fell. Wang was sent to the hospital for a month and spent more than 2,000 yuan. It was identified that Wang's head injury constituted a minor injury. Later, Wang Moumou appealed to the court and demanded that Li Moumou and his son compensate * * * 24,000 yuan.

In the mediation process of this case, the judge in charge directly proposed to both parties that the two defendants should compensate the plaintiff Wang Moumou 16000 yuan, and the dispute between the two parties was settled. Since both parties expressed difficulty in accepting the judge's opinion, the presiding judge negotiated mediation opinions with both parties respectively. The presiding judge said to the plaintiff Wang Moumou: "You hit people first in this dispute, and you are more responsible for the consequences of the dispute. And judging from the current evidence, it is not clear whether Li's son hit your head with a brick or whether you accidentally fell and hurt your head. Although the two defendants admitted in the conciliation statement that Li's son had hurt you, the admission of both parties in the conciliation statement could not be used as the basis for the judgment. Once mediation fails, the defendant identifies himself as accidentally falling and hitting your head during the trial, and I can only make a judgment according to law. [3] "At the same time, the judge in charge said to the defendant Li Moumou and his son," Since you admit that Li Moumou's son injured Wang Moumou, it is clear that the responsibility is entirely on your side. If you don't accept mediation, I will make a judgment according to law, but not the amount of compensation now. In addition, Wang's injury has constituted a minor injury. If I don't accept mediation, I can only report to the leader and consider whether to transfer it to the public security organs according to the crime. " In the end, both the original defendant and the defendant accepted the judge's mediation opinion.

In the mediation process of this case, the presiding judge directly put forward his own mediation opinions, so that both parties can feel the judge's attitude towards this dispute. Give both sides a feeling that they will offend the judge if they don't accept mediation opinions. In further personal contact with both parties, the presiding judge hinted that if the mediation opinion is not accepted, the plaintiff will lose more benefits; The defendant deliberately exaggerated the severity of legal sanctions or the serious legal consequences of his actions (of course, this way must be based on the premise that the parties do not understand the specific provisions of the regulations), while the judge showed a reasonable appearance, leaving room for future rulings. In the end, the two sides accepted the mediation opinion under the pressure of the judge.

2. Analyze the case from the standpoint of the Party. The judge sincerely cares about the client, understands his world and feelings, puts himself in the position of striving for the best interests of the client, gains the full trust of the client, and enables the two sides to reach a mediation agreement. For example, Guo Moumou v. Mianyang Branch of China Telecom.

Mianyang Branch of China Telecom placed a bracket on all the houses owned by Guo Moumou, the plaintiff, to set up a communication optical cable. The defendant informed the plaintiff in advance that the optical cable bracket would be placed on his house, but the plaintiff did not explicitly agree. During the period of 15 years after the defendant installed the optical cable bracket, the plaintiff did not raise any objection. After the "5. 12" earthquake, the plaintiff's house was cracked on the wall where the defendant installed the optical cable bracket, so it must be strengthened and repaired. Therefore, the defendant was told to the court to remove the optical cable bracket, compensate for the economic losses, and pay the cost of 15 occupying the side wall of the house.

During the mediation process of this case, the judge in charge chatted with Guo Moumou, usually pulling up the family, first talking about the huge losses caused by the earthquake, and then talking about the success of Guo Moumou in running a small shop, and unconsciously returning to this case. The presiding judge pointed out that "telecommunication optical cable belongs to the category of great social interests, and it is impossible for us to ask the defendant to dismantle the optical cable bracket immediately. Moreover, according to the telecom regulations of the 1990s, the telecom company only needs to inform you to install the optical cable bracket on the side wall of your home, and does not need your consent. Moreover, the fifteen-year side wall use fee you requested is not clearly stipulated in the law. Even if we award the defendant compensation for your loss, you should know that the defendant is China Telecom. If the defendant refuses to execute the judgment, the difficulty of court execution can be imagined. You don't know how many times you've gone wrong in the future. It's better to settle things with less money and go back to run your shop well. With these efforts to run the court, you have already earned your money back. " The exchange of opinions between the presiding judge and the defendant focused on the identity of China Telecom's central enterprises, emphasizing that if the case is delayed for a long time, it will inevitably damage the image of China Telecom. In order to maintain the corporate image, it is worthwhile to pay some money. Finally, the two sides reached an agreement.

In the mediation process of this case, the presiding judge directly considered the problem from the standpoint of the parties, and made suggestions on the aspects that the parties were most concerned about and valued, so that the parties felt that the judge was actually making mediation suggestions for their own interests, thus consciously accepting mediation.

3. Compliment the parties appropriately. After many contradictions and disputes, both sides have actually felt who is right and who is wrong, but they are unwilling to admit that they are wrong because of face. In this case, the presiding judge should praise the parties appropriately, so that they (or they) feel that the judges all think their actions are reasonable and have a face, so as to accept mediation. For example, in the case of Li Moumou v. Yang Moumou's divorce dispute, it was obvious that the plaintiff was indecisive and even obeyed her mother's personal arrangement, so she appealed to the court to divorce the defendant, but the presiding judge praised the plaintiff for her opinion, and her marriage problem would definitely be decided by herself. As a result, Li's bloodiness was aroused by the compliment of the presiding judge, and he withdrew the lawsuit in court, apologized to the defendant and said that he would treat the defendant well and do his duty as a husband. In the case of Jia Moumou v. Yang Moumou's private lending dispute, it is clear that Yang Moumou maliciously defaulted and did not return Jia Moumou's loan at maturity. However, the responsible judge praised the defendant's loyalty. Even when the family economy was very difficult, he still actively admitted the debt owed to the plaintiff and tried his best to repay the interest first. At the same time, the presiding judge negotiated with the plaintiff, and the plaintiff expressed his understanding of the defendant's breach of contract. As long as the defendant repays the debt as soon as possible, the two sides will remain friends. Therefore, only three days after the case ended, the defendant returned the debt to the plaintiff.

4. Invite people who have a certain influence on the parties to participate in mediation. The parties to the dispute may be too excited to reject the opinions of judges and others, but they can still listen to the opinions of some people who are respected in their eyes [4]. Therefore, in the process of mediation, the judge can invite these people who have certain influence on the parties to participate in mediation (sometimes they don't even need to really participate in the trial, just mentioning their names can play a deterrent role), thus facilitating the parties to reach a mediation agreement. These people who have a certain influence on the parties include their elders, relatives and friends, the staff of neighborhood committees (or village cadres) in their communities, the leaders of their units and so on. For example, in a mediation case of personal injury compensation dispute caused by a fight, the presiding judge invited a respected old man from the village where the original and the defendant were located to participate in mediation. The old man's qualifications and prestige in the village are extremely high. He has been a village primary school teacher for decades, and most people in the village have been his students for three generations. When the old man came to the court, in front of the judge, he knocked the original and the defendant several times with his crutches and said sternly, "Why are you two little babies so ignorant?" You came to the court for an important matter, comrade judge. You completely humiliated our village. When you go back, I will definitely call your father and grandfather together and let them discipline their children and grandchildren. This is not humiliating enough! Come back with me! " As a result, the plaintiff withdrew the lawsuit in court, and the defendant voluntarily compensated the plaintiff for the related losses and apologized.

5. The wide application of power symbols. Whether it's a grand Roman court, a unicorn glaring at the door, as many as a dozen or even dozens of steps, a solemn uniform of judges, a police car, a legal language unknown to ordinary people, or a solemn court scene, etc. It is a symbol of power. This kind of power symbol shows the coercive power of the country, which is a kind of power that makes ordinary people obey, and makes the law, judicial activities and judges gain sacred and inviolable status and authority. When the parties to a case are surrounded by such power symbols, there is always a sense of trembling. In the face of such a huge state machine, personal strength seems to be completely negligible, which makes people lose the courage to fight against it, thus consciously accepting the rule of state laws and obeying the court's judgment. The most typical example of the use of this power symbol is embodied in the circuit trial of the grass-roots court [5], such as the divorce dispute case of Zhu Moumou v. Yu Moumou.

The plaintiff Zhu Moumou sued Yu Moumou and asked the court to grant both parties a divorce. Due to the lower limb disability of the defendant Yu Moumou, in order to facilitate the defendant to participate in the lawsuit, the official judge decided to go to the village Committee office where the original defendant and the defendant were located. On the day of the trial, the presiding judge, dressed in the uniform of the judge, led a clerk and a court office staff to the trial site in a police car. After arriving at the destination, the presiding judge asked the driver to park the police car in the most conspicuous place in front of the village Committee office, and informed the village party secretary to attend the trial in the office together. After the two parties and the village party secretary arrived at the court, the official judge arranged for them to sit down in order (the village party secretary sat on the judge's right hand side), and then took out the gavel specially brought to knock three times before announcing the official court session. The office staff who came with the car were responsible for taking photos and recording the order at the trial site. During the trial of the case, the relatives of the defendant were too excited and had physical collision with the relatives of the plaintiff. After the village party secretary failed to stop it, the presiding judge telephoned the local police station to send two policemen to maintain court order. With the joint efforts of the judges, the police and the village party secretary, the parties finally stopped the unnecessary entanglement and the trial went smoothly. Although the two sides did not reach a mediation agreement in the end, they all expressed their obedience to the court's judgment and the contradictions between the two sides were resolved.

During the trial of this case, the presiding judge used various power symbols to exert influence on the parties. The presence of the office of the village Committee and the village branch secretary at the trial site hinted to both parties that the court trial was fully supported by the "officials" of the village community; The uniform worn by the judge and the mallet specially carried clearly show that the judge represents the will of the state power organs in this trial; The police car parked at the gate of the village Committee office and the police who maintain the court order directly show the parties and the people who are in attendance that the judge relies on the coercive force of the state violence machine; The office staff in charge of information publicity who came with the car took professional cameras to shoot the trial site and record the trial order. In the eyes of the parties and the villagers, this is more like a reporter interview. Once you think that your "scandal" will spread to everyone, the parties will feel uneasy and hope to solve the dispute as quietly as possible.

(b) Application Form for Psychological Tactics of Agent ad litem

Grassroots courts and intermediate courts often act as agents in cases, usually lawyers (and legal workers) in law firms or legal service offices within their jurisdiction. The relationship between the judge and the agent is not formed through a single case, but through long-term work and life contact, which also leads to the different forms of psychological tactics used by the judge to the agent and the parties [6]. Some judges' psychological and tactical application modes for litigation agents mainly include the following two aspects:

1. psychological tactics applied to lawyers (or legal workers). The purpose of this psychological and tactical application is mainly to make lawyers (or legal workers) understand that in their own cases, if they do not cooperate with judges to better handle disputes, they will be greatly suppressed in their future work; On the contrary, if they can actively cooperate with the judge to handle disputes in their own cases, the judge will also give these lawyers (or legal workers) appropriate convenience in their work. The application of psychological tactics did not solve specific cases, but laid the foundation for judges to continue to get the cooperation of lawyers (or legal workers) in their long-term work.

A. resistance in the process of filing a case. For some lawyers who refuse to actively cooperate with the judge to represent the case, the judge will pass it to the court staff through the internal network. Therefore, the judge in charge of filing a case will generally take various measures to suppress lawyers (or legal workers), such as making things difficult for lawyers (or legal workers) when filing a case for review, demanding that the indictment be completely revised even if there is a little mistake, raising the standard of evidence for filing a case, demanding accurate identification of the defendant, and even using the seven-day review period to delay cases that fully meet the conditions for filing a case.

B. boycott during the trial. The judge in charge of the court passively served all the cases represented by some lawyers (or legal workers), so that one or two months after filing the case, the plaintiff often urged the agent many times, but the agent was powerless, which also led to the client's distrust of the agent. The judge can reasonably use the standard of "complicated case" to change a simple case from summary procedure to ordinary procedure, and even take the means of suspending the trial when the conditions for serving the notice are met.

C. resistance in daily life. If lawyers (or legal workers) can contact with judges alone in their lives, or even establish a relatively close relationship, their position in the eyes of clients will also rise sharply, which has a noticeable impact on expanding their case sources and increasing their income. So lawyers (or lawyers) are happy to meet with judges in their lives. Being able to eat, drink tea and even entertain with judges will make them feel more practical in their future lawyer career. This is also the basis for judges to boycott some lawyers in their daily life. By refusing to have any contact with these lawyers, the judges made them think, "Since you refused to cooperate with me in the case I represented in order to settle the dispute as soon as possible, I can only do business with you in the future, and I will be happy to repair you if I have the right opportunity." [7]

D. Give certain benefits to lawyers (or legal workers) who cooperate with judges. For those lawyers (or legal workers) who have been actively cooperating with the judge to resolve disputes, the judge will give as much convenience as possible within the scope of his authority. For example, when filing a case, if all the materials of these lawyers (or legal workers) are not allowed to be supplemented later, file a case directly now; After filing the case, the plaintiff changed the claim. If the copy has not been delivered to the defendant, the judge will allow these lawyers (or legal workers) to directly replace the complaint submitted at the time of filing the case with a new complaint without applying for changing the litigation request. In front of the parties, the judge will choose to be kind to these lawyers (or legal workers), generally do not interrupt their speeches, listen to their opinions properly, and give the parties a feeling that these lawyers (or legal workers) can speak in front of the judge; Allow these lawyers (or lawyers) to use the photocopier and other equipment of the court; Wait a minute.

2. The psychological and tactical application mode of litigation agent in specific cases.

A. belittle the position of the agent ad litem in the eyes of the client. During the trial of a case, the judge does not give the agent face in public, which makes him become speechless in front of the judge in the eyes of the client, thus achieving the purpose of suppressing some lawyers (or legal workers). For example, during the trial, the judge often interrupts the speech of the agent ad litem, or admonishes the agent ad litem in court for some unwarranted reasons, or is kind to the agent ad litem of the other side, but uses harsh words to the agent ad litem of his own side.

B. shake the entrusted relationship between the agent ad litem and the client. After the case goes to the people's court, the judge contacts with one party alone, indicating to the party through words and deeds that the lawyer (or legal worker) entrusted by him is incompetent or unable to strive for the best interests for him, thus shaking the entrusted relationship between the agent ad litem and the party, and even causing the party to unilaterally contact the entrusted relationship between his agent ad litem. Such as Wang Moumou, Chen Moumou v. Yang Moumou, Liu Moumou and traffic accident compensation, a transportation company in County B.

When the sons of the plaintiffs Wang Moumou and Chen Moumou were playing on the roadside somewhere in Area A, they were knocked down by the defendant Yang Moumou driving all the cars owned by Chen Moumou and died on the spot. After investigation, Wang Moumou and Chen Moumou were residents of Area A, Yang Moumou and Liu Moumou were residents of County B. Wang Moumou and Chen Moumou entrusted lawyer C as their litigation agent, and C chose the court of Area A to file a case. The case-filing personnel of the A District Court explained to C that they could choose the B County Court where the defendant was located to file a case, which would facilitate informing the defendant to appear in court to handle the case. However, C has a tough attitude, claiming that "it is the right of the parties to choose to file a case in your A district court, and your court has no right to deprive us of the right to choose the court of jurisdiction." The filing judge was forced to accept the case.

After filing the case, the judge in charge invited the plaintiffs Wang Moumou and Chen Moumou to the office to further explain why the case was filed. The court filing judge suggested that his litigation agent file a case in County B. "On the one hand, all three defendants are residents of County B, and filing a case in County B is conducive to quickly notifying the defendants to appear in court; On the other hand, it is also the most important point. The property of the three defendants is all in County B. Once this case enters the execution procedure, it is difficult for our hospital to enter County B as a foreign court to enforce the property of the three defendants. However, if a lawsuit is filed in the B county court, it will be easier for the B county court to find clues about the defendant's property and enforce it. The reason why your agent ad litem strongly requested to file a case in our hospital is actually just to facilitate his participation in the lawsuit, not for your benefit at all. Alas, such an agent is not as good as none. " Then the judge in charge began to suggest to the plaintiff that in this case, the plaintiff should apply for legal aid, which can not only save the lawyer's fee, but also make the lawyer appointed by the legal aid center more responsible. Finally, the two plaintiffs listened to the suggestion of the presiding judge and dissolved the entrustment relationship with C, and the legal aid center appointed lawyers to appear in court on their behalf.

In fact, the purpose of applying psychological tactics to litigation agents in specific cases is to kill the spirit of some lawyers (or legal workers) and make them actively cooperate with judges to solve disputes in future cases. Because lawyers (or legal workers) are the people invited by the parties to help them handle legal affairs, the parties trust their agents ad litem more out of the traditional psychology of "taking money from others and eliminating disasters for others". Once these agents ad litem voluntarily cooperate with the judge to resolve disputes, the parties can easily accept the judge's judgment or mediation.

Third, the rule construction of psychological tactics in civil trial.

The application of psychological tactics in civil trial greatly improves the mediation rate of cases, reduces the possibility of letters and visits by parties and improves the acceptance rate of parties; However, due to the lack of regulations on the use of psychological tactics in China, it is easy for judges to lose neutrality and openness in practical application, undermine the principle of voluntary mediation by the parties, and lead to the loss of procedural interests and litigation disposal rights, which is suspected of favoring one side. In view of the deficiency in the application of psychological tactics in civil trials, the author believes that the following rules should be constructed to guide and standardize them.

(1) Improve the quality of judges. The use of psychological tactics is more of a spiritual influence, and it is difficult to observe whether it is illegal when it is used externally. Therefore, only by improving judges' moral level and professional quality can we ensure that the use of psychological tactics becomes an important factor to enhance the credibility of the court and promote the construction of a harmonious society, rather than becoming a safe haven for individual judges to abuse judicial power.

(2) When using psychological tactics, judges should ensure their openness, avoid contact with one of the parties alone, and pay attention to the occasions and opportunities of using psychological tactics. If a judge contacts one party alone, no matter what the content of the contact is, the other party will have reasonable doubts about the impartiality of the judge and damage the credibility of the court's judgment.

(3) The court should separate the mediation procedure from the trial procedure, and different judges should undertake different procedures. Mediation procedure precedes trial procedure. In the mediation procedure, a mediation judge presides over the mediation between the two parties. If the two parties fail to reach a mediation, the case will go to trial. In the trial procedure, the presiding judge no longer presides over the mediation between the two parties, but directly goes to court to make a judgment. Of course, if both parties reach a settlement voluntarily, the court can still issue a conciliation statement. This can minimize the phenomenon that the parties have to accept mediation because they are afraid that not accepting mediation will offend the judge and suffer losses in the judgment.

(4) A judge shall meet with the parties, mediate the case, try the case in a specific place and put it on record. If the judge unreasonably uses psychological tactics to influence the decision-making of the parties or agents ad litem when meeting the parties, mediating a case or trying a case, and the circumstances are quite serious, the higher court shall take this factor as the reason for revoking the conciliation statement or judgment.

(five) the use of psychological tactics by judges should comply with the provisions of the current law and its normative spirit. Once a judge uses psychological tactics to violate the provisions of the current law and its normative spirit, it is likely that the final judgment will be overturned by a higher court or retried by our court. Even in some cases, the way judges use psychological tactics is obscure, which does not directly violate the legal provisions, but violates the normative spirit of relevant laws, so the judge's judgment can be maintained, but this judgment will eventually damage the credibility of the court and is not conducive to the formation of people's legal beliefs. For example, the psychological tactics used by judges against lawyers (and legal workers) are all based on the premise of violating the legal provisions or the normative spirit of relevant laws, which greatly damages the image of the court as neutral, fair and honest, and damages the right of lawyers (or legal workers) to legally carry out litigation agency business. Therefore, this form of psychological and tactical application, which obviously violates the legal provisions and its normative spirit, should be banned or regulated through the introduction of specific provisions.

label

Realizing social harmony and building a beautiful home have always been the social ideal pursued by human beings. As the "safety valve" of society and the "mediator" of social contradictions, the court plays an important role in building a harmonious society. If judges can consciously and legally use psychological tactics in the process of judicial trial, then the judicial process or result will be full of affinity. Such judicial process and results will also enhance people's confidence in the judiciary, enhance the credibility of the judiciary, and further promote the formation of people's legal beliefs. However, the judicial practice still pays insufficient attention to the application of psychological tactics in civil trials, and only a few judges are consciously or unconsciously using psychological tactics. The application of psychological tactics in civil trial summarized by the author is only a few of its various forms, some of which still violate the legal provisions or its normative spirit. The author puts forward some suggestions on how to use psychological tactics legally in civil trial, but it is still not deep and specific enough. However, the author still hopes to attract the attention of judicial practice to the application of psychological tactics in civil trials.

-

[1] In this paper, "psychological tactics" is defined as the behavior that judges influence the decision-making of the parties and agents ad litem through actions, words, expressions, surrounding environment and other factors.

[2] In fact, more often, the parties themselves are constantly being instilled with the idea that "if they don't accept mediation, they will offend the judges", and some judges strengthen the self-intimidation of the parties through external factors.

[3] Judges generally do not directly tell one party what kind of specific judgment will be made if both parties do not accept mediation, but only imply that the judgment made will be more unfavorable to themselves.

[4] The more complete the traditional customs are, the better this way can be realized. The local gentry described in Fei Xiaotong's Native China has a greater influence on the local people than the laws of foreign countries, but under the impact of modern society, the local gentry are gradually disappearing, which will also be a fact that China must pay attention to in building a harmonious society.

[5] Zhu Suli emphasized in "Sending Law to the Countryside" that when a national law enters a relatively closed rural society as an external force, it is necessary to construct a partially dominant situation of national law through the rational use of tactics, and the greatest reliance is actually a symbol of power.

[6] Although in judicial practice, there are not many judges who influence litigation agents in the following ways, for the integrity of this article and for the sake of the Supreme Court or other departments to introduce more perfect psychological and tactical rules in the future, the author still lists them one by one.

[7] This situation is similar to the self-intimidation of the parties, and the agent is more likely to exert pressure on himself. Of course, it does not rule out that the personal judgment encountered by the agent will really take the means that the agent thinks.