Every citizen shall have the right of instituting legal proceedings if his right has been injured, and the court shall have the duty to try by process of law. This has been clearly expounded in our Interpretations Yuan-tze Nos. 154 and 160. And the right of instituting legal proceedings must of course be exercised in such a way that the procedure prescribed by law is followed. Article 483 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in providing that "unless otherwise prescribed by law, a ruling given in the course of a proceeding is not appealable," is intended to simplify the procedure and to prevent delay in the process of the litigation. Such a ruling, insofar as it affects the judgment disposing of the case, and if a motion of objection thereto has been filed, is, by making reference to Article 438 of the Act, subject to the adjudication of the court of appeal. While a ruling to order that the party make good the payment of the court costs is held to be nonappealable by Precedent of the Supreme Court K.T. No. 127 (1940), the plaintiff may, where the case was dismissed by a ruling of the court on the ground that the institution of the action was not in accordance with law because the plaintiff failed to pay the court costs, file an appeal on the ground of disagreement on the amount of court costs. In such a case, the court of appeal will have to consider and determine the question of facts involved as well as whether the ruling to require payment of the court costs is reasonable. Thus, the right of the people to sue is by no means affected. We conclude that a ruling of the court to require making good the payment of the court costs is an order given in the course of proceedings, and is nonappealable as provided by Article 483 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and that the provision is intended to prevent delay in the process of the litigation and constitutes no hindrance to the exercise of the people*s right of instituting legal proceedings, and is therefore not in conflict with Article 16 of the Constitution.