According to Article 16 of the Constitution, “The people shall have the right of presenting petitions, administrative appeals, or instituting legal proceedings.” As for the so-called right of instituting legal proceedings, it is a judicial beneficiary right for the people, and it means not only that people may file lawsuits when they believe their rights have been infringed upon, but also that the court shall particularly regard this right, facilitate people’s complaints, and shall not cause any hindrance to it. And this is why Paragraph 1 of Article 121 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides: “If the petition or the written statement is not made in proper form or is defective in other respects, the presiding judge shall fix a period and order the defects to be amended within such period.” If there is an appeal against the ruling without the payment of court costs, since it still could be amended, the presiding judge shall fix a period and order the defects to be amended within such period, and shall not immediately dismiss the appeal by a ruling. Precedent T.K.T. No. 242 (Sup. Ct. 1961) reveals: “If there is an appeal against the ruling without the payment of court costs, the court may decide against fixing a period and ordering the defects to be amended within such period.” Although this Precedent is not in accordance with the above-mentioned opinion, since courts in each grade did not adjudicate on the subject matter of an action in the present case, which means there will not be any substantial certainty effect on the matter, according to the laws the parties may still bring the same action for remedies again. Thus, this irrevocable ruling applying the above Precedent is not a matter of whether the laws or regulations applied by an irrevocable final decision violate the Constitution or not.